FAKIRA SANTA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Koraput -Jeypore dated 02.5.2003 in S.C No.183 of 2000 convicting the appellant for commission of offence under Section 302 of I.P.C and sentencing him to imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution as revealed from the record is that on 09.1.2000 night after taking meals, the appellant and his wife slept in their house. Their daughter Moti -P.W.9 was also sleeping in the house. At about midnight hearing the shout of the villagers, P.W.1 came out of his house and saw the appellant standing with an axe in front of his house. The appellant had been caught by P.W.3 from behind. When P.W.1 asked him as to what happened, both P.Ws.3 and 4 stated that the appellant had gone to their house in the midnight and stated that he has finished. On being questioned he further stated that out of anger he had killed his wife by means of the axe held by him. Thereafter P.W.1 also asked the appellant, who confessed before him to have killed his wife. Thereafter under direction of P.W.1, P.W.4 snatched away the axe from the hands of the appellant. Thereafter all of them along with the appellant went to the house of the appellant and found his wife lying dead with assault marks on her neck. Thereafter apprehending that the appellant may abscond they confined him in the house of P.W.10. On the next day morning the Ward Member -P.W.7 and the Sarpanch -P.W.12 were informed about the incident and they advised to report the matter before the Police Station. P.W.1 thereafter proceeded to Kundra Police Station along with P.W.3 and others and reported the matter orally. The Officer -in -Charge of Kundra Police Station reduced the same to writing and treating the same as F.I.R started investigation. On completion of investigation chargesheet was submitted against the appellant for commission of offence under Section 302 of I.P.C.

(3.) THE prosecution in order to prove the charge examined as many as 14 witnesses but none was examined on behalf of the defence. The plea of defence was complete denial of the prosecution case. Out of the 14 witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution P.W.1 is the Informant. P.W.2 is the Head -man of the village. P.Ws.3 and 4 are the co -villagers. P.W.5 is the daughter of the appellant. P.W.6 is another co -villager. P.W.7 is the village Ward Member and P.W.12 is the Chairman of Panchayat Samiti, who advised for lodging the F.I.R. P.W.8 is a seizure witness and P.W.9 is another co -villager. P.W.10 is a witness in whose house the appellant had been confined. P.W.11 is the Police Constable, who escorted the dead body for postmortem examination and P.W.13 is the Doctor, who conducted the postmortem examination. P.W.14 is the Investigating Officer. Out of these witnesses, P.W.1, the informant, P.Ws.2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 are witnesses before whom the appellant is alleged to have made an extra judicial confession admitting his guilt.