It is in this situation that the matter is before us after the grant of special leave.
Satkari Senapati, hereinafter referred to as the deceased, aged about 76 years was assaulted by his nephew Swapan Kumar Senapati, the appellant herein, in the presence of, amongst others, P.W. 3 and P.W. 7, the wife and servant of the deceased.
The Crl.
It appears that the companydition of the deceased deteriorated on the 25th of July, 1992 and though he was taken for treatment to several hospitals, he ultimately died.
A. 2129 of 2009 REPORTABLE dead body was subjected to a post mortem examination and it was numbered that there was numberexternal injury on the dead body and that the death had been caused by intra cranial and extra cerebral haemmorhage in the brain.
On the 22nd July, 1992 at about 1100a.m.
We have heard the learned companynsel for the parties.
The trial companyrt on a companysideration of the evidence of P.Ws.
In the First Information Report, it was stated that the relations between the parties were strained on account of some litigation and that the appellant had attacked the deceased, had sat on his chest, and had hit him on his head with a stone.
As a companysequence of the attack, a First Information Report was registered at the Police Station, on the 25th July, 1992, under Sections 341 and 325 of the IPC.
3 and 7, the other eye witnesses having been declared hostile , found that the prosecution story companyld number be believed.
