Appeal Nos.6 7/2003 4 Respondent Dibakar Parida fired another shot from his gun towards Chhota Dehury as a result of which the latter received injury in his knees.
He was taken to Kamakhyanagar hospital and immediately shifted therefrom to Dhenkanal Hospital where he breathed his last during treatment.
Respondent Sankar Parida chased Sikar Dehury P.W.11 to give him a push with the gun, but he managed to snatch away the gun from the hand of respondent Sankar Parida.
All the accused persons pleaded innocence and false implication.
5/ Crl.
Respondent Sankar Parida fired a shot from his gun towards Gopal Sahi and the pellet from his gun, of companyrse, hit on the forehead of Athani Das as a result of which Athani Das fell down under a Mahua tree.
On receiving information the O.I.C. of Kamakhyanagar police station reached the spot at about 10.30 A.M. and after receiving information from W.1 which he treated as F.I.R., Ext.1 immediately swung into action.
Deceased Dambaru Behera chased Ganga Parida since dead , but the latter over powered Dambaru and flung him on the ground.
While they were running, on being chased by the prosecution witnesses, appellant Batakrushna Parida received a lathi blow by one Sikar Dehury W.11 as a result of which the gun held by him fell down from his hand and Braja Dehuiry P.W.9 picked up the said gun.
Appeal Nos.6 7/2003 5 Kusana Dehury P.W.7 and one Kashi Behera chased respondent Lambodar Parida, but respondent Lambodar Parida fired a shot at them as a result which Kusana Dehury P.W.7 sustained bleeding injury near his neck.
On 7/ Crl.
In order to establish the accusations, 21 witnesses were examined in the Trial Court.
However the present appellant was companyvicted in terms of Section 304 Part II IPC and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.
There was exchange of pelting of stones form both sides throughout the occurrence.
On the following day i.e.on 2.11.1982 between 9.00 and 9.30 A.M. the respondents belonging to Parida Sahi being armed with lathis and four muzzle loading guns proceeded to Dehury sahi and on their arrival near the house of Banka Dehury the appellant respondent number1 Batakrushna Parida fired a gun shot at Sahadev Dehury who was then engaged in washing his face in the backyard of Banka Dehury.
The State questioned the acquittal of 2/ Crl.
Since there was serious law and order problem, therefore there was a proceeding under Section 107, Cr.
Appeal Nos.6 7/2003 7 companysideration of the evidence on record, the Trial Court held that except the present appellant the others were number liable to be companyvicted.
The Trial Court directed acquittal of all the accused persons who were charged for companymission of offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 148, 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC .
It was alleged that in the night of Kumar Purnima falling on 1.11.1982 the Dehury Sahi people had carried the image of Goddess Laxmi to the house of Bali Parida of Parida Sahi with whom Dehury Sahi people had developed some friendship.
Two appeals were filed against the companymon order Judgment of Learned Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal in Sessions Trial No.25 D of 1983.
However the accused appellant Batakrushna Parida was held to be guilty in terms of Section 304 Part II IPC as he fired from his gun to scare away the prosecution witnesses and in that process a pellet caused a gun shot wound to the deceased which proved fatal.
Two appeals were filed.
The long standing enmity existed on account of a dispute over some forest land as such land was allegedly under the possession of the people of Dehury Sahi.
Three years rigorous imprisonment was imposed as numbered above.
After receiving such gun shot Sahadev fell down with bleeding injury and instantaneously died.
Therefore, the appellant respondents who belong to Parida Sahi raided the house of Bali Parida.
The present appellant filed an appeal questioning the order of companyviction.
Appeal Nos.6 7/2003 6 the dead body of Sahadev Dehury lying in the bari of Bank Dehury where he held inquest over the deadbody in presence of the witnesses and prepared the inquest report.
On receiving the information, investigation was undertaken and companymon charge sheet was filed.
Appeal Nos.6 7/2003 2 the respondents as well as the companyviction of the present appellant in terms of Section 304 Part II, IPC in place of the Section 302 IPC.
Similarly 12 witnesses were examined by the accused persons.
He examined the informant and numbericed 6/ Crl.
Both the appeals were placed together and disposed of by the companymon judgment.
There was numberlove lost between the villagers of Gopal Sahi and Dehury Sahi on one hand and Praida Sahi on the other.
He immediately recorded the statements of some witnesses of village Saruali.
P.C. and several suits 3/ Crl.
After the respondents fired three successive shots from their guns the villagers of Dehury Sahi chased them as a reason whereof the respondents ran hither and thither towards their hamlet Parida Sahi.
Thereafter Sidheswar since dead threw a big stone on the lower part of his abdomen as a result of which he sustained severe injury on his abdomen.
4/ Crl.
The respondents in Government Appeal belong to Parida Sahi whereas the victim as well as the prosecution witnesses belong to Dehury Sahi and Gopal Sahi.
He despatched the deadbody of deceased Sahadev Dehury to Kamakhyanagar Hospital for post mortem examination and other injured persons, namely, Chhota Dehury P.W.6 , Kusana Dehury P.W.7 , Hanua Dehury P.W.12 , Athani Das P.W.5 and Dambaru Behera for treatment.
He also seized the blood stained earth and sample earth from the spot where the deadbody of Sahadev Dehury was lying vide Ext.10.
Appeal Nos.6 7/2003 3 were pending between the people of Dehury Sahi and Parida Sahi.
ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Challenge in these appeals is to the Judgment of a Division Bench of the Orissa High Court allowing the appeals filed by the State.
