RABINDRA MOHANTY Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant, by filing this Appeal from inside the Jail, has assailed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 16/8/2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Balasore in Sessions Trial No.21/232 of 2013 arising out of C.T. Case No.422 of 2013 corresponding to Remuna P.S. Case No.18 of 2013 of the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S.D.J.M.), Baleswar. The Appellant (accused) thereunder has been convicted for committing the offence under Sec. 302/307/201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'the IPC') and accordingly, he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.10,000.00 (Rupees Ten Thousand) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two (2) years for commission of the offence under Sec. 302 IPC; imprisonment for ten (10) years and fine of Rs.5,000.00 (Rupees Five Thousand) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one (1) years for the offence under Sec. 307 IPC; and to undergo imprisonment for three (3) years and fine of Rs.5,000.00 (Rupees Five Thousand) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six (6) months for the offence under Sec. 201 IPC with the stipulation that the substantive sentences would run concurrently.

(2.) Prosecution Case:- In the night of 15/2/2013, Sebati Behera, the wife of Sadananda Behera with her daughter had gone to her father's house leaving her husband and another daughter, namely, Sarmila Behera in their house. When Sadananda and his daughter in the night were going to sleep, accused Rabindra called Sadananda (deceased). It was around 11.30 p.m. Accused called the deceased to come outside and accordingly, the deceased, leaving Sarmila his daughter in the house. The deceased, while leaving, told Sarmila that he would come after a short period. When the deceased did not return home over a considerable period of time since his leaving the place, Sarmila carrying a torch light came outside. She then heard some sound near the house of accused Rabindra. So, she went there and then saw accused Rabindra giving katari blows on her father when Prahallad (since acquitted) was holding one hand of her father with a knife on his other hand and two other persons, covering their faces with black clothes, were standing nearby. Seeing this, when she cried, those two persons, who had covered their faces and were standing near the place where deceased was being assaulted, rushed at her and threatened Sarmila to take away her life if she would disclose the fact to anybody. They then bolted the door from outside by putting her inside the house. On the next morning, Ratnakar Nath (Informant) came to their house and called his son-in-law Sadananda, as if inside the house. Sarmila then started crying and opened the door of the house and described the incident of the previous night before her maternal grandfather (Informant). The wife of the deceased, namely, Sebati Behera was informed. Thereafter, when they went to the riverbank, they saw the dead body of Sadananda floating there. The father-in-law of the deceased Ratnakar Nath then lodged a written report with the Inspectorin-Charge (IIC) of Remuna Police Station, which being treated as FIR, the investigation commenced.

(3.) In course of investigation, the Investigating Officer (I.O) examined the Informant, who had lodged the FIR (Ext.1). He then proceeded to the spot and requisitioned the service of the members of the scientific team available in the headquarters. He prepared the spot map and held inquest over the dead body of the deceased Sadananda. The inquest report (Ext.4) was prepared. He also issued requisition for post mortem examination of the dead body. He seized the blood stained lungi and woolen chadar of the deceased under seizure list (Ext.6). The house of the accused was inspected and from there, blood stained earth, sample earth, small bamboo plank and one plastic mat were seized vide the seizure list (Ext.7). He also issued requisition for medical examination of Gouramani Mohanty, the wife of accused Rabindra. The wearing apparels of the deceased were seized. The I.O. then examined other witnesses and on 22/2/2013, he apprehended the accused in Rupsa area and arrested him. It is stated that the accused Rabindra, having stated before the police to have kept the weapon in a particular place, led the police and other witnesses to that place and gave recovery of the weapon, i.e., Katari, which was seized under the seizure list (Ext.5). The accused was thus forwarded in custody to the Court. In view of the transfer of this I.O, the successor in office of IIC of the Police Station took charge of the investigation and on completion of the investigation, he submitted the final form placing this accused Rabindra to face the trial for commission of offence under Sec. 302/307/201/34 IPC.