PRAMOD KUMAR NAYAK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant herein, calls in question the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31.07.2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Puri in S.T. No. 174 of 2002 convicting him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "the IPC") and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life.

(2.) Prosecution case, in brief, is that in the intervening night of 8/9/.09.2001 the appellant killed his wife by inflicting injuries, by means of an axe on the vital part of her body, and that P.W.2, the Grama Rakhi of the village on receiving information of the incident from P.W.3 the elder brother of the appellant at about 4 a.m. rushed to the spot, noticed the deceased lying dead in her bedroom with profuse bleeding injuries and the appellant being present there. To the query of the P.W.2, the appellant admitted to have killed the deceased. Thereafter, the P.W.2 leaving the appellant under the guard of some people went to Nimapara Police Station and orally reported the incident. His report was reduced into writing and investigation was taken up by the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station (P.W.14). In course of the investigation, the P.W.14 conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased, sent the same for postmortem examination, arrested the appellant, seized the Material Objects including the weapon of the offence upon disclosure statement made by the appellant while being in police custody, recorded the statement of the material witnesses and on completion of investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the appellant under Section 302 of IPC. As the appellant pleaded innocence, trial commenced and prosecution examined 15 witnesses in toto and got entered into evidence, documents vide Exts, 1 to 12. The seized Material Objects were also produced during the trial vide M.Os I to VI. The appellant did not choose to adduce any evidence in defence.

(3.) On evaluating the evidence on record and relying most on the evidence of the important (P.W.2), child witness (P.W.7) who is the son of the appellant and on appreciating the circumstances incriminating the appellant, the learned Trial Court held the charge to have been proved to the hilt and ultimately, convicted the appellant under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced him to life imprisonment vide the impugned judgment and order.