The prosecution failed to establish a sufficient chain of circumstantial evidence to link the appellant to the murder, leading to acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

CHITTARANJAN DASH, J.

1. The Appellant faced trial for the offence under Sections 302 /201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1908 (in short, hereinafter referred to “ IPC ”) for having committed murder of one Parameswar Pradhan (hereinafter called as the “deceased”) with the assistance of another and caused disappearance of the dead body of the deceased by burying the dead body with an intention to screen himself from the legal punishment, and having found guilty thereunder, sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.500/- (Five Hundred), in default, to undergo R.I. for six months more for the offence u/s. 302, I.P.C. and R.I. for two years more and to pay fine of Rs.100/- (one hundred), in default, to undergo R.I. for one month more u/s.201, I.P.C. with a direction to suffer the sentences concurrently.

2. The prosecution case, bereft of unnecessary details, are that on 02.09.2004 at about 9.00 AM the deceased, as of his routine work, went to his cultivable land carrying a spade for cutting the ridges of the field and channeling the water to his land for the growing crops. But he did not return home thereafter. A search was conducted by the family members, but it did not fetch any result. One Sudam Bhoi (P.W.2), a relation of the Appellant and also the deceased went to the house of the Appellant to enquire about the health condition of the Appellant’s elder brother, as he was suffering then. When said Sudam Bhoi asked the Appellant about the health condition of his elder brother, it is alleged that the Appellant voluntarily confessed/ disclosed before Sudam Bhoi that he had killed the deceased, as the latter had applied Black-Magic against his elder brother and confessed to have disposed of the dead body, and stated that his elder brother would be cured very soon. Thereafter, said Sudam Bhoi went to the son of the deceased and informed him about the confession made by the Appellant before him. In the meantime, of course, the informant (P.W.1) had already lodged a missing report before the Tikabali Police Station. However, on the information divulged to the informant regarding the confession made by the Appellant before Sudam Bhoi (P.W.2), a written report was lodged at the P.S. on 27.09.2004. As the report revealed a cognizable offence, the same was registered vide Tikabali P.S. Case No.50 of 2004 and investigation commenced.

3. In course of the investigation, the I.O. (P.W.9) visited the spot on 27.09.2004 itself and prepared the Spot Map under Ext.8. He apprehended the Appellant who disclosed before him to have killed the deceased and to have buried the dead body in his courtyard and pointed out the said spot to the I.O. The I.O. recorded the statement of the Appellant under Ext.3, kept guarding the place pointed out by the accused-appellant and returned to the P.S. along with the Appellant in order to issue requisition for making arrangements for deputation of the Executive Magistrate and the Medical Officer. On reaching at the Police Station, he sent intimation to the S.P. and the C.D.M.O. for deputation of the Medical Officer and the Executive Magistrate. On 29.09.2004, after arrival of the Executive Magistrate and the Medical Officer, he again proceeded to the spot with them and the accused- Appellant, who was present at the P.S., accompanied them. He arrested the Appellant on 29.09.2004 at 1.00 P.M. at the spot. In presence of the