Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S. Muralidhar, Chittaranjan Dash, JJ.
Balku Oram – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
CRLA No. 158 of 2003
Decided On : 29-09-2022
Witchcraft - Murder - IPC 302 - [302 IPC] - The court discussed the applicability of Section 304 Part II IPC and concluded that the accused's actions constituted premeditated murder with unusual cruelty against a defenseless and unarmed person. The court relied on the eye-witness testimony of P.W.3, which was found to be reliable, consistent, and free from contradictions. The medical evidence fully corroborated the eye-witness testimony, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and cancellation of bail bonds.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the death of a woman due to witchcraft practice, leading to the accused assaulting and causing severe injuries to the deceased, resulting in her death. The trial court convicted the accused based on the eye-witness testimony of P.W.3 and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the accused guilty of premeditated murder based on reliable eye-witness testimony and corroborating medical evidence, dismissing the appeal and canceling the bail bonds of the accused.
Issues: The issues involved the applicability of Section 304 Part II IPC, the reliability of the eye-witness testimony, and the sufficiency of evidence to establish premeditated murder.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles established by the Supreme Court regarding the scrutiny of interested witnesses, the reliability of single eye-witness testimony, and the necessity of corroboration. It concluded that the evidence of P.W.3 was reliable, consistent, and free from contradictions, leading to the conviction of the accused.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the bail bonds of the accused were canceled, with a directive to surrender and serve the remainder of the sentence.
JUDGMENT
Dr. S. Muralidhar, CJ. - This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3rd May, 2002 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rourkela in Sessions Trial No.39/246 of 1998 convicting the present Appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 302 read with 2. By the impugned judgment, apart from the present Appellant, the trial Court also convicted Udai Oram (Accused No.1), who had also filed the present appeal jointly with the present Appellant. However, the Court was informed at the hearing on 11th August, 2022 that Udai Oram had expired in 2016 itself and, therefore, the appeal by him was dismissed as having abated leaving only the present Appellant-Balku Oram in the fray.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 17th February, 1998 at around 5 pm, the youngest daughter of Manobodha Naik of village Gundibali Luhakera, Police Station (P.S.) Sector-15, Rourkela in District Sundergarh died. The family members of Manobodha Naik claimed that she died on account of witchcraft practice by the deceased Puni Naik. The further case of the prosecution is that both the accused came to the house of Puni Naik, dragged her from her house and took her near the house of Manobodha Naik and there assaulted her severely by means of a lathi. This was witnessed by Sukra Naik (P.W.3), the daughter of Puni Naik. Sukra Naik was only 16 years old at that time. The case of the prosecution is that the accused also tried to assault P.W.3 but she managed to escape from the spot. Around 12 midnight or 1 am, the early hours of 18th February 1998, Puni Naik died. At 11 am that day, P.W.3 accompanied by her maternal uncle, Hrudananda Ganda went to the PS and gave the written complaint, which was registered as an FIR.
4. The investigating Officer (P.W.9) visited the spot, seized the wearing apparels of the deceased and the blood-stained earth and sent them for chemical examination. On conclusion of the investigation, he laid a charge-sheet against the accused, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. On behalf of prosecution, 9 witnesses were examined and none on behalf of the defence. On analysis of the evidence, the trial Court concluded that the conviction of both the accused for the offence punishable under Sections 302 read with 34 IPC could safely be based on the eye-witness testimony of P.W.3 and proceeded to sentencing them in the manner indicated hereinbefore.
6. This Court has heard the submissions of Mr. Radharaman Dasnayak, learned counsel for the present Appellant and Mrs. Saswata Patnaik, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
7. The memorandum of appeal in the present case seeks to make out a case of applicability of Section 304 Part II IPC and not Section 302 IPC, on the ground that the present Appellants had acted under a grave and sudden provocation as a result of the assumption that the deceased was a witch and that the youngest daughter of Manobodha Naik had expired as a result of witchcraft practiced by the deceased.
8. The testimony of P.W.3, who no doubt is a related witness, is clear and cogent. She witnessed both the accused beating her mother with lathis in front of her eyes mercilessly, resulting in her death. She stood firm in the cross-examination and there was no inconsistency or contradiction elicited from her by the defence.
9. In testing the evidence of such an eye-witness, the following principles as explained by the Supreme court have to be borne in mind. In Piara Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1977 SC 2274 the Supreme Court held:
"4...It is well settled that the evidence of interested or inimical witnesses is to be scrutinised with care but cannot be rejected merely on the ground of being partisan evidence. If on a perusal of the evidence the Court is satisfied that the evidence is creditworthy there is no bar in the Court relying on the said evidence.'
10. In Hari Obula Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh (1981) 3 SCC 675 the Supreme Court observed:
"13.. it is well settled that inter
AI
A sole eyewitness's testimony can be sufficient for conviction if it is credible and corroborated by medical evidence, establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The reliability of child witness testimony is crucial and must be scrutinized carefully; corroborative evidence is essential for convicting based on such testimony, especially when significant incons....
The court ruled that a conviction based on the testimony of a child witness requires careful scrutiny, and inconsistencies can lead to the benefit of doubt for the accused.
Conviction can be sustained based on the sole testimony of a credible witness, irrespective of other witnesses turning hostile.
The court established that sudden provocation can reduce a murder charge to manslaughter, particularly in domestic disputes.
The injured eye-witness testimony holds great evidentiary value and should be relied upon unless compelling reasons exist to discard it.
A conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC can be upheld on the reliable testimony of a single eyewitness, corroborated by medical evidence.
A conviction in a criminal trial can be validly based on the testimony of a single, credible eye-witness. Furthermore, the burden of proving the plea of legal insanity rests on the accused, who must ....
The reliability of a single eye witness and the quality of evidence over quantity, as per Section 134 of the Indian Evidence Act, in establishing guilt or innocence.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
