STATE OF ORISSA Vs. ANIT SINGH @ RABI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE inter se relationship between the two accused persons and between accused Hasina @ Hastina Singh and P.W.1 Ashok Singh are not in dispute. That relationship is also available from the statement of accused Hastina Singh in Ext.4. According to that, accused Hastina Singh and accused Anit @ Rabi Singh are cousin, being the offspring of two sisters. Ashok Singh, P.W.1 is also a cousin of accused Hastina Singh, being the son of her fathers sister.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution, Khage Singh (P.W.12) is the father, Champa Singh, one of the deceased, is the mother of Ashok Singh (P.W.1). Gita Singh (P.W.3) and Niranjan Singh, the other deceased, are the minor sister and brother of Ashok Singh. Ashok Singh married to accused Hastina Singh. By the date of such marriage, accused Hastina had illicit relationship with her cousin accused Anit Singh and even after the marriage, she maintained such illicit relationship with accused Anit Singh.

(3.) LEARNED Sessions Judge, on appreciation of evidence of P.Ws.7 and 10, the two doctors who conducted autopsy respectively on the dead bodies of deceased Niranjan and Champa as per the respective Post -mortem Reports, Exts.14 and 19, found that prosecution has proved that both the deceased persons suffered homicidal death because of multiple injuries, which were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause such deaths. Learned Sessions Judge noted that in absence of eye -witness to the occurrence prosecution relies on the circumstantial evidence to connect the accused persons with the alleged murders. Accordingly, he took into consideration the last seen theory of the accused persons in the occurrence premises, inculpatory confession of accused Hastina Singh recorded by the Magistrate under Section 164, Cr.P.C., recovery/discovery/seizure of incriminating articles like blood -stained earth, blood -stained weapons, blood -stained wearing apparels, etc. besides seizure of other incriminating materials in course of the usual investigation and the finger print test and accordingly made a synopsis of circumstances in paragraph -20 of the impugned judgment to record conviction against both the accused persons under Sections 302/201/34, I.P.C.