ARJUNA DAS Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal, the judgment dated 4-3-1997 passed by Shri N. P. Rout, First Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack in Sessions Trial No. 501 of 1995 convicting the appellant under Ss. 498-A and 325, IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000.00, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months under the first count and to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000.00 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year under the second count has been challenged. The above sentences have been directed to run concurrently. The appellant has been acquitted of the charge under S. 302, IPC.

(2.) Prosecution case briefly stated is as follows :-In the year 1982 the appellant had married deceased Budhei alias Kalpana, younger sister of Narendra Mohapatra (P.W. 5) and daughter of Brundaban Mohapatra. They were co-villagers being residents of village Ragadi under Banki Police Station in the district of Cuttack. The appellant and the deceased led happy conjugal life for the first three years and were blessed with a son two years after their marriage but that son expired within two three days of his birth. Then they were blessed with a daughter who also expired a few months after her birth. It is alleged that the appellant was abusing and assaulting the deceased very often and demanding landed property from his father-in-law and the deceased was frequently going to her parents' house and was returning back to the house of the appellant at the intervention of the friends of the appellant. She had not gone from the house of the appellant to her parents' house since about a year prior to her death in the house of the appellant. It is alleged that the appellant and the deceased had a quarrel in the night of 19-4-95 and in the next morning her deadbody was lying on the verandah of the house of the appellant. Getting information about the death of the deceased, P.W. 5 went to the house of the appellant and found the deadbody of the deceased. He reported the occurrence to the Officer-in-charge of Banki P.S. (P.W. 8) at 8-30 a.m. of 20-4-20000 who registered U.D. Case No. 10 dated 20-4-95 and directed the A.S.I. of the Police Station (P.W. 6) to conduct enquiry. P.W. 6 examined the witnesses, held inquest over the deadbody of the deceased and sent the same for post-mortem examination. Since the post-mortem examination report revealed that the death of the deceased was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the injuries inflicted on her and that the injuries were ante-mortem in nature and death of the deceased was homicidal in nature, he submitted a written report (Ext. 3) on 24-3-1995 to P.W. 8, who treated the same as FIR and registered the case under Ss. 498-A/302, IPC against the appellant and took up investigation. During investigation P.W. 8 visited the spot, examined witnesses, arrested the appellant on 28-4-1995 and forwarded him to Court in custody and preserved the viscera for chemical examination to the R.S.F.L., Bhubaneswar. On his transfer from the Banki Police Station, P.W. 8 handed over charge of investigation to the S.I., Shri B. C. Sethy, on30-5-1995, who after completion of investigation submitted chargesheet against the appellant who stood his trial. The plea of the defence is one of denial and false implication due to dispute with the father of the deceased relating to land.

(3.) In order to bring home the charge against the appellant, prosecution has examined eight witnesses in all out of whom P.W. 5 is the brother of the deceased, P.Ws. 1, 2, 3 and 4 are the neighbours of the appellant, P.W. 7 is the medical officer who conducted the post-mortem examination over the deadbody of the deceased and P.Ws. 6 and 8 are the investigating officers.