MALDAS HANSDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order of sentence dated 27.08.2005 passed by learned Ad -hoc Addl. Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Baripada in S.T. No.9/56 of 2005 -04, convicting both the appellants for offence under Sections 302/201/34, I.P.C. and sentencing each of them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/ - (two thousand) each, in default, to suffer R.I. for six months more for offence under Section 302/34,I.P.C. and to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/ - (two thousand) each, in default, to suffer R.I. for six months more for offence under Section 201/34, I.P.C. with direction for concurrent running of the sentences.

(2.) MALLI @ Maina Hansda is the deceased. She was the first wife of appellant no.1 Maldas Hansda, whose second wife is Budhini Singh @ Hansda (appellant no.2). Both the appellants were staying together. The deceased was staying elsewhere. At about 5.30 p.m. on 21.09.2003 deceased Maina Hansda came to the house of the appellants when they were there in the house and quarreled with appellant no.1 Maldas Hansda alleging as to why he is not looking after her (Maina Hansda). Then she (deceased) went away. Appellant no.1 Maldas Hansda, out of anger, followed her holding a bamboo lathi (M.O. -I) and assaulted deceased Maina Hansda near the house of one Chhunu Majhi (not examined). Appellant no.2 Budhuni Singh @ Hansda arrived there. Deceased Maina Hansda had lost her consciousness as a result of the assault. Both the appellants took the deceased to their house. The deceased succumbed to the injuries in the mid night. Both the appellants thereafter buried the dead body in a nearby place across the railway -line with a view to disappear the legal evidence concerning death of the deceased. Neighbourers of the appellants, namely, Jogeswar Kalandi (P.W.6), Chhunu Majhi (not examined), Paban Baskey (not examined), etc. enquired from the appellants regarding the whereabouts of deceased Maina Hansda, but the appellants took the plea that the deceased has gone away in the morning. On 27.09.2003, after about six days of the occurrence some of the villagers grew suspicious and assaulted both the appellants suspecting some foul play by both of them in missing of the deceased. On being assaulted, the appellants confessed to have buried the dead body of the deceased near the railway -line. Someone from the village concealing his identity informed to the P.S. over telephone regarding murder of the deceased. The S.I. of Police (P.W.14) on being directed by the O.I.C. enquired about the veracity of the phone call. F.I.R. being registered by S.I. of Police (P.W.14), the case was investigated into and on completion of investigation, charge -sheet was filed against the appellants implicating them in offence under Sections 302/201/34, I.P.C.

(3.) PROSECUTION examined 17 witnesses to prove the charge, including P.Ws.6 and 7, who are neighbours of the appellants and had seen the assault by the appellants on the deceased on 21.09.2003. P.W.11, who is a co -villager of the appellants, is a witness to the quarrel between appellant no.1 Maldas Hansda and the deceased. P.W.17 is the Medical Officer, who conducted autopsy. P.Ws.13 and 15 are the I.Os., out of whom P.W.13 had submitted charge -sheet on completion of the investigation.