NIRANJAN CARMA Vs. THE STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT has been convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for life for having committed murder of his wife Gayatri on 26 -6 -1976 at about 9 p.m.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution may be briefly stated as follows: The parents of deceased Gayatri reside in the first floor of their double storied building which is situated in a lane named Sahara para in Bargarh town. A portion of the ground floor was let out to P.W. 11. Janakilal Sunari. The accused -Appellant is the husband of deceased Gayatri. The Appellant lives with his parents on Bhatli Road in Bargarh town. Some days prior to Narasingh Chaturdasi in the year 1976 the deceased came to the house of her parents. The Appellant asked the parents of the deceased to send the deceased to his house, but her parents declined to send her as it was an inauspicious month for daughters to be sent to their father -in -law's house. The Appellant thereupon got angry with his father -in -law and the deceased and assaulted them. Some days thereafter the Appellant came to the house of his father -in -law where the deceased was staying and apologized for the above incident and took the deceased to his house. Somedays thereafter on Narasingh Chaturdasi day in the absence of Appellant, the deceased was brought by her father his house with the consent of the father -in -law of the deceased. Two days thereafter thee Appellant came to the house of his father -in -law and demanded to take back the deceased. As the father of the deceased (P.W. 1) declined to send her, the Appellant got angry and took away the box of the deceased in which her personal belongings were kept. It is alleged that in the evening of the date of occurrence, the accused was found by P.W. 3 coming from the side at the house of P.W. 1. In that night at about 9 p.m. the deceased came down from the first floor of the house to go to the latrine in the ground floor. At that time, her mother (P.W. 2) was preparing Roti. The stair -case leading to the first floor of P.W. 1's house starts from the outer verandah of the ground floor of the building. Soon after the deceased came down to the ground floor through the stair -case, she raised a hulla that she was being assaulted by the accused -Appellant. Hearing her cry, P.W. 2 came running from the first floor where she was preparing Roti and found the accused stabbing the deceased with a knife. On hearing, her hulla, Baidehi (P.W. 3), Raghubir Sharma (P.W. 1), Radhamadhab (P.W. 9), P.W. 11 and many others came there and it is the prosecution case that P.W. 11 chased the Appellant, but could not catch him. The deceased succumbed to the injuries soon after she received the injuries. It is alleged that P.W. 2 narrated what she saw to the persons, who gathered there. At about 930 p.m. on 26 -6 -1976 P.W. 1, the father of the deceased, lodged F.I.R. (Ext. 1) implicating the accused in the crime. The Junior Sub -Inspector (P.W. 13) drew up the F.I.R. (Ext. I), registered a case under Section 302, Indian Penal Code against the Appellant and took up investigation. The Appellant, however, surrendered at Bargarh police station at about 1.30 a.m. in the said night. After completion of investigation, charge -sheet was submitted against the Appellant under Section 302, Indian Penal Code.

(3.) THE learned Sessions Judge relying on the evidence of the eye -witness (P.W. 2) and the corroborating evidence of P.Ws. 1, 3, 9 and 11 has convicted the Appellant. Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant, submitted that the evidence of P.W. 2 should not be believed in view of the inherent improbabilities in her evidence. Further lack of motive, suppression of material evidence and certain glaring circumstances threw a great deal of doubt about the veracity of the prosecution case.