In murder cases based on circumstantial evidence, a complete chain of evidence establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt is critical; any reasonable doubt must lead to the acquittal of the accused.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. SAHOO, J.

1. The appellant Sunita Mundari faced trial in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rourkela in Sessions Trial No.132 of 2011 for commission of offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter “I.P.C.”) on the accusation that on 27/28.06.2011 in village Jhirpani, she committed murder by intentionally causing the death of her husband Mangal Mundari (hereinafter “the deceased”).

The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 20.12.2012 has been pleased to hold the appellant guilty of the offence charged and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.

Prosecution Case:

2. The prosecution case, as per the first information report (hereinafter “F.I.R.”) (Ext.3) presented by Laxmi Badaik (P.W.15), the second wife of the deceased before the Inspector in-charge of Jhirpani police station on 29.06.2011, is that she was married to the deceased since last twenty years. The deceased used to reside with his first wife (appellant) and their children in village Jhirpani. The appellant used to quarrel with the deceased for which the deceased had built a separate house at Tungritola, Jagda where P.W.15 used to reside. At times, P.W.15 used to visit the deceased and his children at Jhirpani. On 27.06.2011, P.W.15 came to the house situated at Jhirpani at about 8.00 p.m. and after having the dinner, she went to sleep with the deceased in the inner room. The son of the deceased, namely, Siki (P.W.7) slept in the front/passage room adjacent to the spot room while the appellant along with her daughter Binika slept on the outer verandah. Around the midnight, when P.W.15 woke up to urinate, she found the appellant in the front/passage room where P.W.7 was sleeping. Finding the appellant in that room, P.W.15 enquired from her as to why she was standing there but the appellant did not give any reply. While she was returning after passing urine, she heard the shout of the deceased and rushed inside the house and found the appellant coming out of the inner room with severe burnt injuries in a naked condition. In the meantime, P.W.7 woke up and helped the deceased to lie on the ground. P.W.15 along with P.W.7 tried to extinguish the fire from the body of the deceased. P.W.15 then enquired from the deceased as to how he caught fire on his body to which the latter replied that the appellant poured kerosene on his body and set him on fire. P.W.7 called an autorickshaw in which he along with P.W.15 took the deceased to Sahu clinic and then to C.W.S. Hospital, however, the doctor referred the deceased to Ispat General Hospital, Rourkela and accordingly, the deceased was admitted in I.G.H., but during the course of the treatment, on 28.06.2011, the deceased succumbed to his injuries. P.W.15 stated in the F.I.R. that the appellant poured kerosene and set the deceased on fire for which he sustained severe burn injuries which led to his death.

On receipt of the written report of P.W.15, the Inspector in-charge of Jhirpani police station, namely, Anil Kumar Pradhan (P.W.14) registered Jhirpani P.S. Case No.44 dated 29.06.2011 under section 302 of the I.P.C. and he himself took up investigation of the case.

During the course of investigation, P.W.14 examined the informant (P.W.15) and other witnesses and requisitioned the District Scientific Officer for appraisal of crime scene. He visited the spot, seized the half burnt clothes and on 30.06.2011, he arrested the appellant and recorded her statement under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and recovered