Circumstantial evidence must form a complete chain of events to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the prosecution's failure to meet this standard warrants overturning of a conviction.

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 08.02.2012 passed by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, FTC, Khurda in S.T. No.53/129 of 2011-2009 arising out of G.R. Case No.153 of 2009 corresponding to Jankia P.S. Case No.25 of 2009 on the file of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khurda.

The Appellant (accused person) thereunder has been convicted for commission of offence under section 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC ’). Accordingly, she has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees Five Hundred) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence under section 302 and rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year for the offence under section 201 with the stipulation that the substantive sentences to run concurrently.

2. PROSECUTION CASE :-

Brajakishore Sahu, the father of Bhikari used to reside outside the village. He had married Kanchan (P.W.9). They were blessed with two sons and two daughters. Two sons are Bhikari and Rabi. Jhunubala (P.W.10) and Renubala are his two daughters. Deceased (Bhikari) had married accused four years prior to the date of incident, which took place in the night of 15/16.02.2009. They were having frequent quarrel between them. In the night of occurrence, Renubala with her mother, Kanchan (P.W.9) were in the maternal house of Jhunubala (P.W.10) at Village-Chhanagiri. Around 2.00 a.m., they received a telephonic call from one Sanjay Swain (P.W.5) that Bhikari had been killed. Hearing the same, Kanchan, Jhunubala (P.w.10) & Renubala returned to their village Tankola and in their house, they found the deceased lying dead in the front room. During that night of occurrence, accused, Bhikari and their two year old son were staying. By the time Kanchan (P.W.9) and Jhunubala (P.W.10) arrived in their house, police personnels from Jankia Police Station, being informed about the incident, had already arrived at the spot. It was around 4.00 a.m. Kanchan (P.W.9) then presented a report (FIR-Ext.10) about the incident. On the basis of the same, the then Officer-in-Charge of Jankia Police Station (P.W.11) registered Jankia P.S. Case No.25 of 2009 and the investigation was taken up. The accused was arrested and she, while in police custody, led the police and witnesses in giving recovery of one “Langala Luha”. The inquest over the dead body was held and the dead body was sent for post mortem examination by issuing requisition. The incriminating articles were also seized in course of investigation and sent for chemical examination through Court. On completion of the investigation, the accused was placed to face the trial for commission of the offence under section 302/201 IPC .

3. Learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khurda, on receipt of the final form, took cognizance of the offences and after observing all the formalities, committed the case to the Court of Sessions for trial. That is how the accused faced the trial after framing of the charge for the said offences.

4. Prosecution, in order to establish its case, has examined eleven witnesses in total. As already stated, Kanchan, the mother of the deceased has been examined as P.W.9 and his daughter has been examined as P.W.10. P.Ws.2 & 7 are the two witnesses to the seizure of that Langala Luha at the instance of the accused while in police custody. Two other witnesses, i.e., P