SASHI JENA Vs. KHADAL SWAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants having been convicted for the commission of the offence under Section 302/34 of the Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge. Berhampur.

(2.) APPELLANT No. 1 is the mother in law of the deceased Saraju and appellant No. 2 is the husband of the deceased. Appellants 3 and 4 are brothers of appellant No : 2 and brothers in law of deceased Saraju. Case of the prosecution is that appellant No. 2 Prasana Kumar Jena had married deceased Saraju alias Salu, daughter of P.W.2 and P.W.4 about six and half years prior to the date of occurrence. The deceased was ill treated by her husband and was also subjected to torture for non fulfilment of demand of dowry of Rs. 5000/ . Further case of the prosecution is that at the time of marriage dowry articles worth rupees twenty thousand had been given by the parents of the deceased. On 4.5.1986 the deceased met P.W.1 and requested him to inform her parents about demand of further amount of rupees five thousand and she had expressed before him that if the amount is not paid she would be killed. P.W.1 assured the deceased to convey the news to her parents, but unfortunately on the same day the deceased was killed. Getting information about such death and the shout of P.W.1 who was an eye witness to the occurrence, some people came running to the place but were obstructed from getting inside the house by the appellant No. 1. Immediately after the occurrence P.W.1 returned to his village and informed about the incident to the parents of the deceased, P.Ws.2 and 4. When P.Ws. 2, 4 and 5 along with other came to the house of accused persons, again appellants No.1 did not allow them to enter inside the house. Gramarakhi of the village reported the matter to the Buguda police station and under the direction of the O.I.C.. U.D. case was registered and enquiry was taken up. During such enquiry the officer seized some articles and after getting opinion about the nature of injuries sustained by the deceased formal F.I.R. (Ext. 15) was registered for the offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code and investigation was taken up. In course of investigation the Investigating Officer examined witnesses and had submitted Final Report. Thereafter. P.W.2, father of the deceased, filed protest petition which was treated as complaint. In the complaint enquiry was taken up under Section 202 Cr.P.C. and on the basis of materials available during enquiry cognizance was taken in respect of offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code and accused persons faced trial.

(3.) IN order to bring home the charge the prosecution examined seven witnesses and several documents were exhibited. Learned Additional Sessions Judge on consideration of the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and also P.W.6, the doctor who conducted post mortem examination, found that all the appellants in furtherance of their common intention committed murder of the deceased and as such found them guilty for the offence committed under Section 302/34 of the Penal Code.