LAWS(ORI)-2017-11-39

NARAHARI GOUDA Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

Decided On November 11, 2017
Narahari Gouda Appellant
V/S
STATE OF ORISSA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Narahari Gouda faced trial in the Court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jeypore in Criminal Trial No.138 of 2013(T) for offences punishable under sections 302 / 201 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of his wife Manguli Gouda (hereafter 'the deceased') on 24.02.2013 night at village Bada-Atal and also causing disappearance of evidence by concealing her dead body. The learned trial Court acquitted the appellant of the charge under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and found that a case under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is not made out, however, he found the appellant guilty under section 304 Part-II of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand), in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) The prosecution case, as per the first information report lodged by P.W.2 Dhana Gouda before the Inspector in charge, Boipariguda police station on 25.02.2013 is that the deceased was the wife of the appellant and their marriage was solemnized twenty to twenty five years prior to the date of occurrence and on 25.02.2013 at about 11.00 a.m., one Rabindra Santa village Bhadraguda came and informed the informant about the death of the deceased. Hearing such news, P.W.2 and his younger brother Somanath Gouda rushed to village Bada-Atal where they found the deceased lying dead in a Dangar nearer to the village. They came to know that there was some dispute between the appellant and the deceased during the night on 24.02.2013 for which the deceased was assaulted by means of a lathi and her dead body was thrown in the Dangar. It is stated that the occurrence was witnessed by the mother-in-law of the deceased namely Pratima Gouda and P.W.4 Lalu Gouda who is the son of the appellant and the deceased. It is further stated that there used to be quarrel between the appellant and the deceased relating to family dispute and the appellant was suspecting the character of the deceased. On the basis of such first information report, P.W.10 Ramachandra Nayak, Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Boipariguda Police Station on the direction of the Inspector incharge took up investigation of the case. He examined the informant, deputed a constable to guard the dead body. On 26.2.2013 he visited the residential house of the appellant, prepared the spot map and also visited the Dangar where the dead body was disposed of and prepared map of that place. He held inquest over the dead body and prepared inquest report (Ext.1). He collected blood stained earth and sample earth from the Dangar under seizure list Ext.6. He dispatched the dead body for post mortem examination to C.H.C. Boipariguda. On 26.2.2013 the appellant was arrested and while in custody, the appellant led the police party and gave recovery of one lathi which is stated to be the weapon of offence and accordingly, the same was seized under seizure list Ext.2. The I.O. collected sample earth and blood stained earth from the house of the appellant under seizure list Ext.8, seized the lungi of the appellant in presence of the witnesses under seizure list Ext.9, wearing apparels of the deceased under seizure list Ext.10. The appellant was forwarded to the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Jeypore on 27.02.2013. The I.O. sent the seized articles to the Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Berhampur for chemical examination and on 24.06.2013 after completion of investigation, he submitted charge sheet against the appellant under sections 302 / 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) During course of trial, the prosecution examined eleven witnesses.