They found that Saita Naik was lying unconscious in the bed of the river.
Appellant Banka Nayako is the servant of Radhakrishna Choudhury.
A post mortem examination was performed on the body of Saita Naik by Dr. K. K. Misra P.W. 13 .
A report of the incident was lodged by Golla Nahaka P.W. 10 at Hinjilikatu police station.
The prosecution examined Nabadwipa Padhi P.W. 2 .
Nabadwipa Padhi P.W. 2 went to Hinjilikatu and then to Aska, and narrated the incident to Ramchandra Choudhury P.W. 1 .
It will be recalled that Ramchandra Choudhury P.W. 1 was the person who had employed Saita Naik and was involved in criminal and civil cases against the appellants.
He found several injuries on his body, and his report is on the record as Ex.
Moreover, Dandapani Khandual P.W. 7 and Murli Biswal P.W. 9 have number companyroborated his statement.
Saita Naik was the servant of Ramchandra Choudhury P.W. 1 and was his supporter in the litigation.
A dacoity case started by Ramchandra Choudhury P.W. 1 was pending against the accused on the date of the incident.
He was accordingly taken there, but he died by the time he reached Hinjilikatu.
Both of them went to Pattapur Police Station and lodged a report at 2 a.m. It is alleged that, in the meantime, Golla Nahaka P.W. 10 , who was a nephew of Saita Naik, heard about the incident from Bishnu Gouda P.W. 5 at mauza Puddo, and went to Ghodahada river along with some villagers including Saita Naiks son Musa Nayak P.W. 3 .
He was involved in some cases started by appellant Dandapani Choudhury.
At the trial Bishnu Gouda P.W. 5 did number support the case of the prosecution.
It is alleged that Ramchandra Choudhury P.W. 1 started from his village Punando on March 5, 1969, at about 4 p.m., along with Saita Naik and reached Hinjilikatu at about 6 p.m. He then left for Aska by bus.
The dispute related to partition of joint family properties, and gave rise to several civil and criminal cases.
Fourteen accused were challaned and the Sessions Judge of Ganjam Boudh, Beh rampur, companyvicted them all of the offence of rioting armed with deadly weapons under Section 148 and of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. He sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence under Section 148, and to imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. On appeal, the High Court upheld the companyviction and sentences of the present appellants, but acquitted the remaining eleven accused.
He had also started some criminal cases against the appellants and was a witness for Ramchandra Choudhury P.W. 1 in some cases against the accused.
Saita Naik, Nabadwipa Padhi P.W. 2 and Bishnu Gouda P.W. 5 left for Punando.
When they reached the numberthern bank, it is alleged that Nabadwipa Padhi and Bishnu Gouda found that all the fourteen accused who were challenged in this case were present near a ditch armed with Khanatis, lathis and Katis.
While they were passing through the dry bed of Ghodahada river, it is alleged that Saita Naik stayed back to answer the call of nature, while his two companypanions proceeded towards the numberthern bank of the river.
on inquiry, Saita Naik informed those present that Dandapani Choudhury and Radha Krishna Choudhury had pierced him with khanatis and Banka Nayako had struck him with a kati on his head and that he expressed a desire to be taken to Hinjilikatu where he said he would give further details of the incident.
They began to attack Nabadwipa Padhi P.W. 2 and Bishnu Gouda P.W. 5 but they ran away.
All the injuries were found to be ante mortem and Saita Naiks death was found to be due to the companybined effect of synocope and companya.
Appellants Dandapani Choudhury and Radhakrishna Choudhury are said to have pierced him with khanatis, and Banka Nayako hit him with a kati on the head.
Musa Nayak is said to have given him some water, and he regained companysciousness.
It is further alleged that.
Bishnu Gouda P.W. 5 , Ganapati Choudhury P.W. 4 and Khalli Padhi P.W. 8 as eye witnesses of the incident.
Of the remaining three witnesses, Nabadwipa Padhi P.W. 2 has been held by the High Court to be an interested witness, and rightly so, for he has admitted that he look ed after the cultivation of Ramchandra Choudhury P.W. 1 for a period of five years.
S. Shinghal, J. This appeal of Banka Nayako, Radhakrishna Choudhury and Dandapani Choudhury, by special leave, is directed against the appellate judgment of the Orissa High Court dated February 10, 1971, upholding their companyviction for an offence under Section 302/34, I.P.C. and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life.
It is number in dispute, and is in fact admitted, that there was a long standing dispute between Ramchandra Choudhury P.W. 1 on the one side, and appellants Radhakrishna Choudhury and Dandapani Choudhury on the other.
