KRUSHNA CH. SAHU Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Puri in which the Appellant has been convicted for commission of offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE Appellant is the husband of the deceased. Case of the prosecution is that six to eight years prior to the date of occurrence the Appellant had married the deceased. At that point of time the Appellant was staying with his parents and other family members at Jagannath prasad. After the marriage the deceased was subjected to ill -treatment cruelty as a result of which she came back and took shelter in her parents' house. Thereafter the Appellant shifted the village Adakata Chhak where the deceased joined him. But even when were staying separate from in -laws the deceased was being ill -treated and tortured. Once the deceased had come to her parents' house and she got information that second marriage of the Appellant was being planned, she filed a suit for restitution of conjugal life. After receipt of notice in the Said suit the Appellant and his brother compromised the matter with the deceased and her parents. After compromise was arrived at the in the said suit the Appellant and the deceased again lived together for sometime. The deceased again forced to go out of the house and she had to file an application for maintenance under Section 125. Code of Criminal Procedure After receipt of notice in the said case the Appellant came forward for compromise and the compromise having been effected the deceased came back to the house of the Appellant. Fifteen days prior to the date of occurrence again the deceased was driven out of the house. On the date of the occurrence the deceased had come to the house of the Appellant to take clothes and when she was leaving the house of the Appellant the Appellant requested her to return to his house. Though they had two children because of ill -feeling between the husband and wife the eldest son was staying in the house of maternal grand -father and the youngest was one and half years old at the time of death of her mother. At the request of the Appellant the deceased came back and stayed with the Appellant. Next day morning she was found dead in the house of the Appellant.

(3.) IN order to bring home the charges the prosecution examined 17 witnesses and several documents were exhibited, Learned Sessions Judge on consideration of the evidence of P.Ws. 1.17 and documents such as opinion of doctor expressed in the post mortem report, report of the S.F.S.L. etc. came to conclusion that the death was homicidal one. On consideration of the evidence of other witnesses learned Sessions Judge though did not find any supporting materials for offence under Section 498 -A of the Penal Code or Section 4 of the D.P. Act, found that materials were available to indicate that the Appellant was the author of the crime so far as murder of the deceased is Concerned and accordingly convicted him under Section 302 of the Penal Code.