Back
2008 Supreme(Ori) 703
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA
N. Prusty, I.M. Quddusi, JJ.
STATE - APPELLANT
Versus
KUMAR PENTHEI AND OTHERS - RESPONDENT
Decided On : 15-10-2008
The judgment underscores the requirement for clear and reliable evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt in criminal cases, emphasizing the importance of a thorough and unbiased investigation.
Headnote:
Criminal Law - Murder - IPC Section 302, Evidence Act Section 27 - The judgment discusses the circumstantial evidence, extra-judicial confession, and flawed investigation in a murder case. The court emphasized the need for clear and reliable evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was dismissed due to lack of compelling reasons to interfere with the acquittal.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the murder of Iswar Sahoo, with the prosecution relying on circumstantial evidence and an extra-judicial confession by one of the accused. The investigation was found to be flawed and the evidence contradictory.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to establish a clear chain of circumstances to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The flawed investigation and contradictory evidence led to the acquittal of the accused.
Issues: The key issues included the reliability of circumstantial evidence, the admissibility of an extra-judicial confession, and the adequacy of the investigation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for clear and reliable evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, highlighting the importance of a thorough and unbiased investigation.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed as the court found no compelling reasons to interfere with the acquittal.
JUDGMENT :
I.M. Quddusi, J. - This Government Appeal has been filed against the Judgment and Order Dated 19th September, 1984 passed by the Learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar in Sessions Trial Case No. 13 of 1984 acquitting the Respondents of the offence punishable u/s 302 I.P.C. It may be mentioned here that during the pendency of the appeal, the appeal as against Respondent No. 6, Gautam Singh ' Naik was dismissed vide Order Dated 17.12.1990.
2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that one Banshidhar Sahu, son of Haguru Sahu of village Godhuli under Telkoi police station in the district of Keonjhar appeared in Telkoi police station at 8.30 a.m. on 8.10.1983 along with one Rama Chandra Swain and Dheneswar Sahu of his village and lodged verbal report in the P.S. stating that Panu Sahu, the elder brother of the father of the informant is a rich man and maintains his livelihood by cultivation. He has a rice mill at Bhimkand and his only son Iswar Sahoo looked after the management of the rice mill. In the previous night after returning from the rice mill Iswar after taking his meal retired to bed and slept on a cot on the varendah of his bed room. His wife and children slept inside the bed room and his father and mother slept on two cots on the southern side varendah.
3. In the morning of 8th, the son of Iswar Sahoo along with two of his servants came to the informant's house which is situated at a distance of half kilometer towards north and after waking him up informed that some unknown person has killed his father by slitting his throat and he was lying in a pool of blood. On getting the information, the informant went to the house of Iswar and found him lying dead on a cot with his throat slit. He further stated he had no knowledge if the deceased had any misunderstanding with anybody. The information was reduced to writing by the OIC and the informant signed the same after admitting the contents to be true. Thereafter, case u/s 302 was registered and investigation was taken up by the I.O. and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the Respondents to stand trial for offence punishable u/s 302/34 I.P.C.
4. Plea of the Respondents was one of denial.
5. To bring home the Charge against the Respondents, prosecution examined as many as fourteen witnesses and defence examined one witness. P.Ws.1, 2, 3 and 4 are respectively the widow, son, father and mother of the deceased who claimed themselves to be the eye witnesses to the occurrence. P.W.10 is the informant. P.W.12 is the Medical Officer who conducted post-mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased. P.Ws.8 and 11 are the seizure witnesses arid P.Ws.13 and 14 are the Investigating Officers.
6. On consideration of the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution, the Learned Sessions Judge came to hold that there was paucity of evidence to bring home the charge against the Respondents and therefore he acquitted all of them.
7. There is no doubt that the death of the deceased was homicidal. P.W.12 conducted the post-mortem examination over the dead body of the deceased and found the following external injuries:
i. The tongue of the deceased was protruded having some blisters on the trunk, frosty bloody mucus from nostril and mouth with distended abdomen and swollen penis and scrotum.
ii. There was one incised wound of 6" length x 2" depth x V2" breadth on the neck below thyroid cartilage extending from middle of neck towards the right side in a horizontal direction with incised wound of trachea, neck vessels and streno cloyed mastoid muscles of right side.
8. The cause of death, as stated by the doctor, was due to asphyxia and shock as a result of injury to trachea and great vessels of right side neck. The time of death was stated to be 36 to 48 hours before his examination. The doctor further stated that the injury was possible by the Farsa, M.O.I which was sent to him for opinion.
The occurrence took place inside the house in the night when all
