SUKRU HARIJAN Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal from jail is directed against the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhawanipatna, in Sessions Case No. 20 -K/22 of 1980 convicting the appellant under Section 302, I. P. C and sentencing him to undergo R. I. for life.

(2.) A short narration of the facts leading to the present appeal is that on the 30th August, 1979 the appellant and his third wife Satyabati, the deceased, were sleeping together at night in the Mancha situated at the back side of their house. While they were talking, some unknown persons focused a torch -light towards the Mancha. Some time thereafter, the deceased went out saying that she would attend the call of nature. As the deceased did not return for a long time, the appellant fell asleep. But subsequently when he woke up and looked for his wife, he did not find her. He, therefore, went out to find the deceased when he saw two persons leaving the premises by focusing a torch -light. When Satyabati came back, the appellant questioned her about her fidelity. She replied that she would do whatever she liked. The next morning at about 9 o'clock the appellant and the deceased went together to the forest for collecting twigs. As both of them did not return to the village till the 2nd of September, 1979; P. Ws. 7 and 8 proceeded to the Jubrajpur outpost for giving a missing report. While they were so proceeding, they saw the appellant with a Tangia coming from the outpost along with a police officer. The prosecution case is that in the morning of 2nd September, 1979, the appellant went to the Jubrajpur outpost and gave the first information report incriminating himself for the murder of his wife Satyabati. It is also the case of the prosecution that while the appellant was accompanying the police officer, P. Ws.7 and 8 also accompanied them and on the information given by the appellant, they went to the place of occurrence and the dead body of the deceased was recovered. Thereafter, the appellant was formally arrested by the police. Inquest was held over the dead body and it was sent for post mortem examination. Investigation having been completed, the appellant was charge -sheeted under Section. 302, I. P. C. and put on trial.

(3.) DURING trial, 12 witnesses including the doctor P. W. 1 who held post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased and two police officers, P. Ws. 4 and 12, were examined. On an appreciation of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court has returned a verdict of guilt and has convicted and sentenced the appellant as already stated above.