BIDHAN MANDAI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE sole Appellant was prosecuted for commission of murder of his wife Pusparani Mandal and convicted under Section 302, IPC by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Malkangiri and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE prosecution story as revealed in the trial Courts' judgment is that in the evening of 22.11.99 the informant (father of the appellant), his wife and younger son were absent from their house. The informant's wife went to the house of one Nirmal Burman to call her second son Biswanath Mandal and on return she found that the Appellant and his wife were absent from the house. It is further alleged that the Appellant had left the house after quarreling with his wife on the preceding Saturday and returned to the house in the afternoon of some day, i.e. 22.11.99 and taking advantage of the absence of other family members and seeing his wife Pusparani alone he was said to have killed his wife. The informant, his wife and younger son searched for the Appellant and his wife in the same night, but could not get trace of them. In the early morning of the following day, i.e. 23.11.99 the family members of the informant got information that deceased Pusparani is lying dead with cut injuries on her neck in a paddy field about 2 kms. away from their house. On receiving the said information the informant went to the spot and thereafter proceeded straight to the police station for lodging information. The informant lodged information at the Police Station and on receiving information the police registered a case and proceeded to investigate into the case. The I.O. visited the spot, held inquest over the dead -body of the deceased, despatched the deadbody for post mortem examination, examined the witnesses, arrested the accused -Appellant and recovered the Kati (M.O.I) pursuant to the discovery statement made by the Appellant under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and after completion of investigation placed the charge -sheet in Court.

(3.) PROSECUTION in all examined 19 witnesses, but could not examine the I.O. since it is alleged that he was killed by the Naxalities before commencement of the trial. So far as the death of deceased Pusparani is concerned, there is no dispute that she met with a homicidal death on account of injuries. P.Ws. 1 and 2 are the father and mother respectively of the Appellant. P.W.1 was the informant in this case, but the scribe of the FIR could not be examined. P.W.7 is the sister of the Appellant. P.W.6 is the mother of the deceased and Ors. are post occurrence witnesses.