Judgment By Court: This appeal arises out of the judgement of conviction dated 16.09.2003 and order of sentence dated 18.09.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Chaibasa in Sessions Trial No. 7 of 1998, convicting the appellant under sections 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for life. 2.The prosecution case in short is that in her fardbeyan recorded on 6.3.1997, the informant-Narmi Kandir (PW-2) stated that in the previous night she awoke on the cry of her husband and saw that the appellant was extracting tangi which was inserted near the eye of her husband. In the light of the dhibri (lamp) burning in the room, she identified the appellant. She also saw the other accused Sukhram Bodra standing outside the door of her house who was flashing torchlight on the deceased. On alarm, both the accused fled away. Her husband died due to the said injury. The cause of incident was that the appellant wanted to marry the step daughter of the informant which was protested by the deceased and for which the appellant had given threats of dire consequences to the deceased. 3.Prosecution examined five witnesses. PW-1 is a hearsay witness, but he supported the version of the informant. 4.PW-2 is the informant. 5.PW-3 is the person who interpreted the narration of the informant and is a witness to the FIR as well as inquest report and seizure of the blood stained soil. 6.PW-4 is the doctor who conducted postmortem on the dead body of the deceased. 7.PW-5 is the I.O. who submitted the charge sheet. 8.Mr. Rajan Raj, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing on behalf of the appellant, assailed the impugned judgment on various grounds. He submitted that the prosecution has not been able to prove it's case beyond all reasonable doubts. 9.Mr. Ravi Prakash, learned counsel for the State, supported the impugned judgment. 10.The doctor (PW-4) who conducted postmortem on the dead body of deceased, found sharp cut injuries 4 ½” x1”x2” extending middle of left maxillary region to middle of temporal region; left maxilla was cut; left temporal bone was cut; temporal lobe of brain was lacerated; cranial cavity filled with blood. As per the opinion of the doctor, injuries were caused by sharp cutting weapon which may be tangi. PW-2 who is the only natural eyewitness, has fully supported the prosecution case. As per the opinion of the doctor, injuries were caused by sharp cutting weapon which may be tangi. PW-2 who is the only natural eyewitness, has fully supported the prosecution case. On minor contradiction, her evidence cannot be thrown away. The doctor has fully supported her version. 11.After carefully going through the records and hearing the parties at length, in our opinion, prosecution has been able to prove it's case against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubts. There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of PW-2 and other witnesses. 12.In the result, this appeal is dismissed. 13.After the judgment was dictated, the State counsel pointed out that on the recommendation of the Sentence Review Committee, the appellant has already been released after serving out the sentence.