Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S. Muralidhar, Chittaranjan Dash, JJ.
Seshadev Swain & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Orissa – Respondent
CRA No. 259 of 1996
Decided On : 26-09-2022
Criminal Law - Conviction under Section 302 IPC - [Criminal Law] - [Section 302, Section 34 IPC] - The court discussed the circumstances and evidence presented by the prosecution, including the leadership of factions, the accused persons going armed with weapons, extra judicial confessions, and threats made by the accused. The court applied the principles of circumstantial evidence as laid down in various judgments to evaluate the chain of events and concluded that the circumstances pointed unerringly to the guilt of the accused. The appeal was dismissed, and the accused were directed to surrender forthwith.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased, Rabindra Swain, and his field servant, Kubera Jani, went missing, leading to suspicion of foul play. The prosecution presented circumstantial evidence to establish the guilt of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the circumstances presented by the prosecution, including factional enmity, armed accused persons, extra judicial confessions, and threats made by the accused, pointed unerringly to the guilt of the accused.
Issues: The main issue was the evaluation of circumstantial evidence to establish the guilt of the accused under Section 302 IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles of circumstantial evidence as laid down in various judgments to evaluate the chain of events and concluded that the circumstances pointed unerringly to the guilt of the accused.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the accused were directed to surrender forthwith.
JUDGMENT
Dr. S. Muralidhar, CJ. - This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20th August 1996 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khurda in Sessions Cases arising out of G.R. Case No.224 of 1991 committed by the JMFC, Banpur, convicting the present six Appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 IPC for causing the death of Rabindra Swain and Kubera Jani on the crest of Bhalleri hill near village Pratap between 4 and 5 pm on 16th September, 1991. Each of the Appellants was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. The Appellants and twenty other co-accused were all acquitted of the offences under Section 3(2)(v) and (vi) of the SC and ST (PoA) Act, 1989 and Section 120 (B), 201 IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Rabindra Swain was the younger brother of Golakha Swain (P.W.1), the Informant, who belonged to village Pratap. Rabindra Swain was in need of a servant for tending his buffaloes. Therefore, in the morning hours of 16th September 1991, he and his field servant Kubera Jani, the second deceased, went to the village Chhaka Singh situated in the terrains of Bhalleri hill. However, till 5 pm that evening he did not return leading P.W.1 to suspect that something was amiss.
3. Therefore, P.W. 1 along with Barendra Swain, son of deceased Rabindra Swain and Bijaya Patnaik (P.W.4) went towards village Chhaka Singh searching for the deceased. Before P.W.1 went up the hill, he met Raja Baliarsingh (P.W.3) who was working on a brinjal field in the foothill of Bhalleri. P.W. 3 asked P.W.1 where he was headed to. On hearing that P.W.1was looking for his brother, P.W.3 disclosed to him that he had seen six of the accused (A1 to A6) going with deadly weapons towards Chhaka Singh an hour before. This increased the suspicion of P.W.1 and he requested P.W.3 to accompany him towards Chhaka Singh.
4. P.W.3 then accompanied P.W.1 and P.W.4. While they proceeded further towards Chhaka Singh they heard the entreaties of someone pleading not to be killed. These were feeble. P.W.1 recognized it to be the voice of his brother Rabindra Swain. He along P.W.3 and others went towards the direction from where the voice came. They noticed the first six accused persons coming down the slope of the hill with bloodstained Katis. Besides, the clothes of the accused were also stained with blood. When they noticed P.Ws.1, 3 and 4 and Narendra Swain i.e., the son of the deceased, the accused are stated to have made a hasty retreat into the jungle.
5. The search party went further up the hill to a place where a deity known as Dalakhai Thakurani had been installed on the Ghat Road. They then found blood clots on the Ghat road in front of the temple. They could not trace out the two deceased persons and decided to return to the village. P.W.1 then informed the APR force posted in village Pratap to prevent a breach of peace. The APR force advised P.W.1 to go to the Banpur Police Station (PS) to lodge an FIR at once.
6. At 11 pm, on 16th September 1991, P.W.1 lodged an FIR at the Banpur PS before Surendra Kumar Baliarsingh (P.W.16) who was the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) who registered PS Case No.132 of 1991 under Section 302/34 read with 120-B IPC and Section 3 of SC & ST (PoA) Act, 1989. P.W.16 then took up investigation, visited the spot in the early hours of 17th September 1991 and found a patch of blood on the footpath (Ghat Road) at a distance of 10 feet from the Dalakhai Thakurani Deity. He followed the trail of blood into the bushes and found the dead body of Kubera Jani at a distance of 30 feet from a ditch. He took out the body and kept it on a plain surface. At around 4.30 am, he discovered the headless body of Rabindra Swain lying near a bushy growth. He further discovered the head of the deceased Rabindra Swain lying at a distance of 40 feet from the trunk under a bamboo clump soaked with blood.
7. At 6 am on 17th September 1991, P.W. 16 held an inquest on th
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of principles of circumstantial evidence to evaluate the chain of events and establish the guilt of the accused.
In criminal cases based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a complete and unbroken chain of evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
For a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish a clear chain of evidence that excludes reasonable doubt regarding the accused's guilt.
The legal principle established is that the entire deposition of an eyewitness should not be discarded if some portion is found to be false, and the legal requirements for establishing guilt based on....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on circumstantial evidence to establish the guilt of the accused under IPC Section 302.
In murder cases based on circumstantial evidence, each link must be established beyond reasonable doubt, with all evidence consistently pointing to the guilt of the accused.
The judgment establishes that a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence requires a clear and conclusive chain of evidence, and that extra-judicial confessions must be corroborated by relia....
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
