LAWS(ORI)-2012-4-45

NAGA @ NAGESWAR BINDHANI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On April 04, 2012
Naga @ Nageswar Bindhani Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 28.5.2003 passed by learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Baripada in Sessions Trial Case No.18/32 of 2002. The appellant stood charged for commission of offences under Sections 302/309 of the I.P.C. and was found guilty of both the charges and convicted thereunder. He has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/ - and, in default, to undergo R.I. for six months for his conviction under Section 302 of the I.P.C. No separate sentence was imposed for conviction under Section 309 of the I.P.C.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution is that on 24.9.2001 the Grama Rakshi of Umadeipur beat, P.W.7, lodged a written report at Jharpokharia Police Station to the effect that at about 7.00 A.M. P.W.2 came to his house and informed that the appellant had killed his wife in the previous night. Thereafter, he went to the spot and found the deceased lying dead in a pool of blood and he also noticed cut injury on her face and neck. The appellant was found sitting on the verandah. When he asked the appellant regarding death of the deceased, the appellant remained silent. P.Ws.1, 4 and other villagers also asked the appellant and thereafter the appellant disclosed that in the previous night there was a tussle between him and the deceased for money and as the deceased did not obey him, he killed her by means of an axe. The villagers remained in guard and he went to the police station for lodging information. On the basis of such information, F.I.R. was registered for commission of offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C. On completion of investigation charge -sheet was submitted not only for commission of offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C. but also for commission of offence under Section 309 of the said code.

(3.) PROSECUTION in order to establish the charge, examined eight witnesses, but none was examined on behalf of the appellant. The appellant took a plea that on the day previous to the date of occurrence he had gone to Bangriposi and on his return he found his wife lying dead having cut injury.