Conviction based on unreliable evidence, particularly last seen theory and coerced extra-judicial confession, cannot meet the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

D. Dash, J.

The Appellant, by filing this Appeal from inside the Jail, has called in question the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 17^th October, 2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhadrak, in Sessions Trial No.42/192/85 of 2013-11 arising out of G.R. Case No.1107 of 2011 corresponding to Dhamnagar P.S. Case No.104 of 2011 in the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S.D.J.M.), Bhadrak.

The Appellant (accused) thereunder has been convicted for committing the offence under section 302/363 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC ’) and accordingly, he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-Five Thousand) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three (3) years for the offence under section 302 ; and rigorous imprisonment for three (3) years and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one (1) year for the offence under section 363 with the stipulation that the substantive sentences would run concurrently.

2. Prosecution Case:-

On 11.07.2011, the daughter of the informant aged about 13 years had gone to Village-Ichhada along with her friends and younger sister Baidehi Jena (P.W.11) to see the return Car festival. In that festival place, the accused called the elder daughter of the informant and asked her to call his younger brother. When the daughter of the informant left the spot, accused followed her in the gathering. The informant (P.W.2) although waited up-to night, his elder daughter did not return. So, the informant and others enquired the whereabout of the deceased, but could not get any trace. The younger daughter of the informant (P.W.11) had seen the accused following the deceased in the place where she had been to see the Car festival and she told this fact in the night. Around 11.00 p.m., the mother of the deceased (P.W.3), who is the wife of the Informant asked the accused regarding the whereabouts of the deceased. The accused then declined to have any knowledge as regards that. On 12.07.2011 in the morning around 8.00 a.m., the Informant (P.W.2) and seven to eight other villagers went to the nearby sugarcane field in search of the deceased and to their surprise, they found the ridge of the field to have been cut. The elder brother of the informant (P.W.5) then having proceeded in a narrow route extending towards the sugarcane filed, found the button of the shirt of the deceased lying and marked foot prints on the way ahead. Following the foot prints, all went inside the sugarcane field and saw the dead body of the deceased in a naked condition and her neck to have been tied with her Ghagara and Chadi. It was then learnt that after committing the rape on the deceased, she had been strangulated to death. The informant, P.W.5 and villagers then asked the accused about the happenings, who then confessed to have intentionally caused the death of the deceased by strangulation after committing rape upon her. The accused also confessed his guilt before others. The matter was then report by the informant (P.W.2) to the Inspector-in-Charge (IIC), Dhamnagar Police Station, who treating the same as the FIR (Ext.2), registered the case and took up investigation.

3. In course of investigation, the Investigating Officer (I.O.-P.W.14) examined the Informant (P.W.5) and recorded his statement and those of other witnesses under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1