SATRUGHANA ALIAS SATURA MAJHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant has been convicted under Section 302 , Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

(2.) THE prosecution case may be stated in brief. Makar Majhi (the deceased), the accused and Kalia (p.w. 3) are brothers. About 4 years back there was a dispute between the accused and the deceased over this lands. There was an amicable settlement through the intervention of the village punch. This lands were divided. Even thereafter they continued to quarrel. In Jesthe 1965 the accused administered some poison in the rice to be taken by the deceased. The deceased made a station diary entry (Ext. 6) at the Champua Police Station. Thereafter the accused and his wife (p.w. 18) left this village Kasipal and went to do labour in the mining area. On 25 -10 -1965, p.w. 9 found the accused sitting near a hillock in the afternoon. There was some instrument lying near the accused which looked like a Bala. P.ws. 7 and 8 saw the accused coming towards village Kasipal at about evening. p.w. 2 the sister of the accuses, and p.w. 4 the daughter of the deceased were sleeping with the deceased in the same room. They found the accused inside that room focusing a torch in that very night but this evidence has not been accepted. In the following morning the deceased was found dead with injuries on his person, the accused was arrested on 27 -10 -1965. While in police custody be gave discovery of the Bala (M.O.I) from inside a bamboo bush. The Bala, on serological test, was found to contain human blood. On the aforesaid facts, the Appellant was charged under Section 302. Indian Penal Code. The defence is one of denial. The learned Sessions Judge held that the death was homicidal and that the Appellant killed the deceased. The finding that the death was homicidal is not assailed before us.

(3.) THESE findings, in this ultimate analysis, boil down to the existence of 3 important circumstances. They are: