STATE OF ORISSA Vs. KALANDI NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal by the Government is directed against the judgment dtd. 30/11/2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (FTC-II), Bhadrak in S.T. Case No. 18/27 of 2009 acquitting the Respondents of the offences under Ss. 498-A/304-B read with Sec. 34 of IPC and Sec. 4 of the D.P. Act. At the outset, it requires to be noticed that during the pendency of the present appeal, Respondent No. 1 who have the father-in-law of the deceased expired and, therefore, the appeal as far as he is concerned, has already abated.

(2.) The charge against the accused is that he subjected to the deceased Mami @ Manasi, who had married the accused No.2/Appellant No. 2 Dhirendra Nayak on 13/3/2007 to cruelty throttling before her death due to poisoning on 31/5/2007.

(3.) In order to bring home the charge against the accused, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses whereas one Bijay Kumar Sahu(D.W.1) was examined on behalf of the defence. One common feature of all the D.Ws. was the improvements made by them while deposing in the Court. When each of the P.Ws was confronted with the previous statement made by them to Police during investigation under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C., it transpired that in those statements, no allegation of torture or cruelty and that too, prior to the occurrence. Consequently, the trial Court found that their deposition on the crucial aspect of the deceased being subject to cruelty in torture prior to her death was not believable at all. The following observations in the trial Court in the impugned judgment are relevant in this regard: