GANDURU NAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rourkela in S.T. No. 145/39 of 1994 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (In short, TPC') directing the appellant to undergo imprisonment for life is under appeal.

(2.) The horrendous story depicted by the prosecution is as follows: The deceased is admittedly the wife of the appellant and they were residing with their adopted son in a one-roomed mud-walled house in a slum area of Rourkela town. Although a few children were born, but none of them could survive. Therefore, they adopted P.W. 1 as their son. In the night of 16/17.11.1993 the appellant is said to have seen a dream in which his late mother appeared and disclosed to him that the deceased had killed all the three sons by administering poison. On seeing such dream, the appellant suddenly woke up and sat on the chest of the deceased, who was sleeping along with him and pressed her neck. Noticing such ugly scene, P.W. 1, the adopted son who was sleeping by the side of the deceased, woke up. The appellant ordered him to bring a 'Dauli' so that he would cut the throat of the deceased. But P.W. out of fear, ran away and went to the house of his maternal uncle, P.W. 2, who was residing at a distance of 100 yards from the house of the appellant and explained the incident to him. P.W. 2 on being informed by P.W. 1 rushed to the house of the appellant. By that time the appellant had dragged the body of the deceased outside the house and had slit her throat. P.W. 2 saw the deadbody of the deceased lying there and also saw the appellant standing with a farsa and Dauli in his hand. Simultaneously, few other villagers from the slum area assembled there. The appellant is said to have made an extra-judicial confession before the villagers who assembled at the spot as to the reason why he had killed the deceased. Thereafter, the villages present at the spot tied the hands of the appellant and sent information through P.W. 2 to the police. During investigation, the weapon of offence, and the blood-stained wearing apparels (napkin) were seized, witnesses were examined, appellant was arrested, the incriminating materials were sent for chemical examination and on completion of investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet.

(3.) Although eight witnesses had been Examined on behalf of the prosecution, but the trial court has mainly relied upon the testimony of P.Ws. 1 and 2. P.W. 1 is none other *than the adopted son of the appellant who had no axe to grind against him. His presence at the spot was natural. His evidence disclosed that in the night of occurrence he slept along with the wife of the appellant. At about midnight, the appellant was seen to have sat on the chest of the deceased and made an attempt to throttle her neck. While this exercise was continuing, P.W. 1 woke up from sleep and noticed the appellant grappling the deceased's neck. He ordered P.W. 1 to bring a Dauli, who being panic-stricken rushed to the house of P.W. 2, his material uncle and narrated the entire incident to him. The maternal uncle, P.W. 1, also supported the version of P. W. 1 and stated that when he along with P.W. 1 came to the house of the appellant, they found the appellant standing near his house while the deceased was lying dead with cut injuries. The other villagers were already present at that time. In a normal query by the villagers including P.W. 2, the appellant made an extra-judicial confession as to the reason why he had killed his wife.