Extra-judicial confessions must be corroborated and credible; lack of evidence undermined the conviction of the accused in a homicide case.

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 23^rd June, 2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj at Baripada in S.T. Case No.135 of 2014 arising out of G.R Case No. 184 of 2014 corresponding to Kaptipada P.S. Case No.52 of 2014 of the Court of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate (SDJM), Udala.

The Appellant with her husband namely Ratikanta Mohakud faced the Trial being charged for commission of offence under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, ‘ IPC ’) and it is the Appellant, who alone has been convicted for commission of offence under section 302 of the whereas her husband has been acquitted of the charge. Accordingly, the Appellant (accused) has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and indefault of payment of fine, to further rigorous imprisonment for 6(six) months for commission of offence punishable under section 302 of the .

Prosecution Case:-

2. On 11.05.2014, Arun Mohakud (Informant-P.W.1) and his wife Shanti Mohakud (deceased) had been to attend the marriage ceremony of their nephew Babuli Biswal. They returned to their house in the morning of 02.05.2014. Since they had not gone for sleep in the last night, after taking Pokhala (watered rice), the husband of the deceased i.e. informant (P.W.1) slept on the veranda of his house. It is said that the deceased went to the house of this accused Astami being called by her. It be stated here that the accused is related to the deceased as sister- in-law. It was around 4 p.m. in order to give money to the drummer of the village namely, Kalandi Mukhi, the informant accompanied by that Kalandi, went to the house of this accused. They then found none to be present in the house but could notice broken bangles of the deceased and her ear-flower with a thenga lying on the veranda. He then could see that his wife was sleeping inside the house with her legs and hands upwards in a necked condition. So he showed the same to that Kalandi Mukhi. The informant (P.W.1) then went to call the villagers including the ward Member, sarpanch and choukidar who too came and saw the dead body of Shanti. It is stated that by that time accused Astami was returning from jungle. Seeing them present in her house, she ran towards the jungle again and while she was running, she was telling to have killed the deceased. It has also been stated that although they had tried to catch hold of her, the accused somehow managed to conceal her presence. The husband of the deceased namely, Arun Mohakud then presented a written report to the Officer-in-charge (OIC) of Kaptipada Police Station. The OIC then treating the said report as FIR (Ext.1) immediately registered the case and directed one Sub Inspector of Police attached to that Police Station to take up investigation.

3. In course of investigation, the Investigating Officer (I.O-P.W.11) examined the informant and other witnesses namely Kalandi. Having visited the spot, he prepared the spot map (Ext.8). He also seized other incriminating materials in presence of the witnesses and prepared seizure list. The Inquest over the dead body of the deceased being held by him, he prepared the report (Ext.2). He then issued requisition for Post Mortem over the dead body of the deceased. The accused was also medically examined. The incriminating articles were sent for chemical examination through Court.

On completion of investigation, Final Form was submitted placing the accused and her husband (since acquitted) to face the Trial for commission of offence un