LAXMI DEI ALIAS NAIK Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal from jail, Laxmi Dei alias Naik (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') calls in question legality of her conviction for an offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'I.P.C.') and sentence of imprisonment for life awarded by learned Sessions Judge, Sundergarh. According to prosecution, she killed her husband Lalindra Naik (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') by means of an axe.

(2.) Sans unnecessary details, prosecution version as unfolded during trial is as follows : Accused and the deceased entered into wedlock about fifteen years prior to the date of incident and had two children. Deceased's father Parameswar Naik (P.W. 7) was residing in a separate house. Their son was about ten years of age and daughter of seven years at that time. Accused usually used to sleep with her husband with the two children. On the night of the date of occurrence i.e. 9-2-1992, informant Parameswar Naik (P.W. 7) and his wife returned from the Sundergarh weekly market and accused prepared chicken curry for them. After some time, Subas, son of accused came to the house of his grandfather and wanted to sleep with him. Thereafter, the granddaughter Jayanti also came to sleep with her grandmother (P.W. 8). The grandparents and the two children slept together. In the morning Parameswar requested Jayanti to go to her house to bring some paddy from her mother the accused, for preparation of fried rice, but the girl returned and told that her mother was absent from the house. They waited thinking that she might have gone to ease herself. Some time after, Subas, went to bring paddy being sent by the informant, but he returned and told P.W. 7 that his far was lying injured having sustained bleeding injuries and the accused was absent from the house. Hearing the cry for help some of villagers arrived. Previously the accused Laxmi had eloped with Santosh Raksa (P.W. 4) of their village twice. Suspecting her involvement report was lodged at the Sadar Police Station by Parameswar (P.W. 7). On receipt of information, Officer-in-charge of the Police Station took up investigation and the accused was apprehended at village Garjan on 20-2-1992. In the meantime, the axe which was used in commission of the offence was seized. During trial, accused pleaded innocence. Though she admitted to be wife of deceased, she stated that she was absent from home and had gone to village Garjan prior to date of occurrence searching for a job.

(3.) In order to bring home its accusations, prosecution examined 12 witnesses. Though there was no eye-witness, to the occurrence, taking various circumstances into consideration, learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh, found the accused guilty, and convicted and sentenced her as aforesaid.