RUSIA MULI Vs. STATE OF ODISHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-petitioner has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sec. 302/201 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000.00 (rupees five thousand), in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year for the offence under Sec. 302 of the I.P.C. and to undergo R.I. for a period of seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000.00 (rupees five thousand), in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year for the offence under Sec. 201 of the I.P.C. and both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently by the learned Sessions Judge, Gajapati vide judgment and order dtd. 13/7/2018 passed in S.T. Case No.140 of 2016.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 14/8/2016 and the occurrence in question took place on 13/8/2016. Learned counsel further submits that the case is based on circumstantial evidence and the main circumstances are the extra judicial confession before the villagers in a village meeting and the last seen of the appellant in the company of the deceased. The learned counsel further submits that the evidence on record does not form a complete chain so as to unerringly point towards the guilty of the accused and there are good chances of success in the appeal and therefore, the bail application may be favorably considered.

(3.) Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the prayer for bail and placed the evidence of P.W.1, a witness to the extra judicial confession so also P.W.3, the witness to the last seen and he also placed the evidence of the doctor (P.W.15) who stated to have noticed ante mortem injuries on the person of the deceased and opined that the cause of death is shock, which was the combined effect of neurogenic and hemorrhage.