The central legal point established in the judgment is the conflicting interpretations of the status of Grama Rakhi as a police officer and the admissibility of extra judicial confessions made before Grama Rakhi.

JUDGMENT :

Pradip Mohanty, J. - Aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh in S.T. No. 215 of 1998 convicting the Appellant u/s 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to imprisonment for life, the Appellant has preferred this Jail Criminal Appeal.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 25.05.1998 at about 4.00 P.M., the Appellant along with his wife was returning from his in laws house. Near Rajabasa-Siliguda road, a dispute arose between the couple, inconsequence whereof, the Appellant lost his temper, picked up a stone from the roadside and pounded the head of the deceased with that stone, as a result of which, she sustained bleeding injury and died instantaneously. On the next day, the Grama Rakhi went to the spot and found the deceased lying there and a lot of blood had come out from her head. He orally reported the matter at Tensa Out Post and the S.I. reduced it to writing and transmitted the same to Lahunipada Police Station for registration of the case. After investigation, Final Form was submitted u/s 302, I.P.C. against the present Appellant.

3. The plea of the accused-Appellant is complete denial of the allegation.

4. Prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses and proved fifteen documents to bring home the charge to the Appellant. Defence did not choose to adduce or produce any evidence. The trial Court, by its judgment convicted the present Appellant u/s 302, I.P.C. and sentenced him to imprisonment for life basing upon the evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 3, before whom the alleged extra judicial confessional had been made by the accused-Appellant.

5. Learned Counsel for the Appellant assails the impugned judgment mainly on the ground that extra judicial confession is a weak piece of evidence. That apart, the so-called extra judicial confession made by the Appellant before P.Ws. 1 and 3 is inadmissible, since P.W.1 is a Grama Rakhi. As the conviction is based only on the extra judicial confession the same is liable to be set aside. In support of his submission, he relies on the decisions in Mandan ' Undu Barik v. State of Orissa, 43(1977) CLT 512; Dusasan Bhoi and Others Vs. The State of Orissa, ; Boisakhu Kollar v. State 60 (1985) CLT 61 and Pandru Khadia Vs. State of Orissa, .

6. Mr. Mohapatra, learned Counsel for the State, vehemently contended that there is sufficient material against the present Appellant P.Ws. 1 and 3, before whom the Appellant made the extra judicial confession, are reliable witnesses. Moreover, Grama Rakhis not a police officer and the extra judicial confession made before him can be acted upon. In this connection he draws our attention to the decisions in Raj Kumar Karwal Vs. Union of India and others, and Khageswar Khatua Vs. State of Orissa, .

7. Perused the records and the decisions cited by the parties. In the instant case, P.W.1-Bishnu Patra, the Grama Rakhi is the informant. He has stated in his deposition that about four years back in a Monday night, the accused-Appellant came to him and confessed his guilt saying that he had killed his wife by means of a store in the jungle path near Rajabasa. After confessing his guilt, the accused-Appellant requested him to take him to the police station. As it was dead of the night, P.W.1 asked the accused-Appellant to sleep in his house with assurance that he would take him to the police station on the next day. That night, the accused-Appellant Slept in his house. Next day, the accused-Appellant led him to the place where the dead body was laying. Thereafter, both P.W.1 and the accused-Appellant went to the Tensa police Out Post where P.W.1 orally reported about the incident before the S.I., who reduced the same to writing. P.W.2 is the Medical Officer, who conducted the autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and found the following external injuries:

(i) A lacerated wound of the size 3 c.m. x 4 c.m. situated over 5 c.m. above from the left ear.

(ii) a lacerated wound of the size 4 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. situ