ARSU MURMU Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 25.6.2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj, Baripada in S.T. Case No. 130 of 2001 convicting the appellant for commission of offence under Section 302 of I.P.C. and sentencing her to imprisonment for life.

(2.) P .W.1 -Arjun Murmu appeared in Jashipur Police Station on 26.12.2000 at about 3.00 P.M and reported that he was the eldest amongst the three brothers and they were leaving in separate mess for 20 to 25 years in village Podagarh prior to the occurrence. His youngest brother Surai Murmu (the deceased) had married the appellant 15 to, 20 years prior to the occurrence but they had no issue. Normally the deceased used to sit near the house by making a little fire and also used guard fowls in the threshing floor. On the date of occurrence P.W.1 did not find the deceased nor did he find any fire in the threshing floor. Therefore he went in search of the deceased thinking that he might have gone to the market. He made some enquiries from the villagers and when he came back to the house of the deceased, he found the house opened and the deceased was lying dead on his bed inside the house. There were cut Injuries on the heard and neck of the deceased. One axe was found lying near the dead body of the deceased stained with blood. The appellant, who is the wife of the deceased, was not found in the house and accordingly he went and reported the matter to the village Headman. Thereafter some other villagers appeared near the house of the deceased and found the appellant sitting on the back side verandah of the house. When they enquired from her as to how the deceased died, she confessed to have killed him on the ground that the deceased was eating away goats and fowls. Thereafter he went to the Police Station and lodged the report on the basis of which investigation was conducted and on completion of investigation charge sheet was submitted against the appellant for commission of offence under Section 302 of I.P.C.

(3.) THE trial court found the appellant guilty of the charge under Section 302 of I.P.C relying on the evidence of P.Ws. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7, who stated about an extra judicial confession made by the appellant in their presence, the evidence of P.W.10, the Doctor, who conducted the postmortem examination as well as the chemical examination report, which proved availability of human blood on the axe.