The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK JCRLA No.77 of 2012 : (A) AND CRLA No.106 of 2014 : (B) From the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 30th June, 2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuapada in C.T. No.03 of 2011. Jayaram Herna (In both the Appeals) ---- -versus- …. Appellant State of Odisha (In both the Appeals) …. Respondent Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/Physical Mode): For Appellant - Mr.Biswajit Nayak and Mr.S.K.Tripathy (Advocates) For Respondent - Mr.S.K. Nayak, Additional Government Advocate
Legal Reasoning
CORAM: MR. JUSTICE D.DASH MR. JUSTICE G.SATAPATHY Date of Hearing : 31.10.2023 : Date of Judgment :13.11.2023 D.Dash,J. The Appeal as at (A) had been filed by the Appellant from inside the jail and subsequently, the Appeal as at (B) has been filed by the Appellant through his private counsel. Therefore, JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 Page 1 of 11 - 2 - both have been tagged for their disposal by this common judgment. The Appellant, by filing these Appeals, has called in question the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 30th June, 2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuapada in C.T. No.03 of 2011 arising out of G.R. Case No.339 of 2010 corresponding to Komna P.S. Case No.113 of 2010 of the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S.D.J.M.), Nuapada. The Appellant (accused) thereunder has been convicted for committing the offence under sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’). Accordingly, he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one (1) year for commission of the said offence. 2. Prosecution Case:- Shibaram Sahu, the Inspector-in-Charge (IIC-P.W.9) of Komna Police Station (P.S.), received a telephonic message from Grama Rakhi Purna Chandra Sunani (P.W.4) of Village Karlakot that the accused had killed his mother, namely, Padma Herna. The IIC (P.W.9), having got the message, as aforesaid, entered the said fact in the station diary book maintained at the P.S. and immediately sent one police constable to guard the dead body. Page 2 of 11 JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 - 3 - He then proceeded to the village and reached in the house of the accused. He saw the dead body of Padma Herna lying there. At the spot, Kabi Herna (P.W.2), the paternal uncle of the accused orally reported the matter before the IIC (P.W.9). The said oral version of P.W.2, being reduced into writing, was treated as the FIR and investigation was taken up. It was the report that the father of the accused had three brothers and they four had got their landed properties partitioned. The father of the accused had got one house and one acre of agricultural land in his share. He, however, was residing with his family members in Village- Bhuliasikuan for earning his livelihood by working as a daily labour. But, they used to come to Village Karlakot and stay in their house for showing paddy and also during the harvesting season. Fifteen days prior to the incident, the parents of the accused had come to Village-Karlakot for harvesting paddy crops and three days before the occurrence, the father of the accused left for Village-Bhuliasikuan leaving his wife Padma in the village. It is stated that on 22.11.2010 around 11.00 p.m., the father of the accused, his brother-in-law (Lochan Bag) and the accused came to Village-Karlakot and after some time, the father of the accused left for Village-Bhuliasikuan along with Lochan Bag leaving his elder son, who is the accused and his wife, namely, Padma (deceased) in their house. During evening hours, when Kabi Herna (P.W.2), the paternal uncle of the accused was JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 Page 3 of 11 - 4 - standing on the road near the spot, he was told by his wife that since Padma, the mother of the accused was raising hue and cry, he should immediately go to the house of the accused to see as to what was happening there. Kabi Herna (informant-P.W.2) then went to the house of the accused and saw the door of the house of the accused was slightly open and the accused was inside the house. Seeing the accused, when he (P.W.2) asked the reason of such hue and cry raised by Padma, he did not give any reply immediately. So, Kabi (informant-P.W.2) entered into the house and then he saw Padma lying dead. A dibri light (lamp) was then burning. He saw Padma to be lying dead with injuries on her face and head. It is stated that the accused, being asked, then confessed to have killed his mother (Padma). Kabi (informant- P.W.2) immediately went to the Grama Rakhi and other villagers informed them about all these above. The Grama Rakhi, in turn, informed the IIC (P.W.9) over telephone, who, when arrived, was told about the incident by P.W.2, which was so reduced into writing by the IIC (P.w.9) and that was treated as the FIR (Ext.6). 3. In course of investigation, the Investigating Officer (I.O.- P.W.9) examined the Informant (P.W.2) and other witnesses as also recorded their statements under section 161 of Cr.P.C. He (P.W.9) having visited the spot, prepared the spot map (Ext.7). He too held inquest over the dead body of the deceased and JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 Page 4 of 11 - 5 - prepared the report to that effect (Ext.8). The dead body of the deceased was sent for post mortem examination by issuing necessary requisition. Blood stained earth and sample earth, blood stained bangles of the deceased and blood stained stone lying near the dead body of the deceased were seized by the I.O. (P.W.9) under seizure lists (Ext.9, Ext.10 & Ext.11). The seized incriminating articles were seized for chemical examination through Court. On completion of the investigation, the I.O. (P.W.9) submitted the Final Form placing the accused to face the Trial for commission of the offence under section 302 of the IPC. 4. Learned S.D.J.M., Nuapada, on receipt of the Final Form, took cognizance of said offence and after observing the formalities, committed the case to the Court of Sessions. That is how the Trial commenced by framing the charge for the aforesaid offence against the accused. 5. The prosecution, in support of its case, has examined in total nine (9) witnesses during Trial. As already stated, the informant who happens to be uncle of the accused is P.W.2 whereas his wife is P.W.1. P.W.3 is the father of the accused. P.W.4 is the Grama Rakhi who gave the information to the I.O. over telephone. The Doctor, who had conducted the autopsy over the dead body of the deceased, has been examined as P.W.5. The I.O. of the case has come to the witness box at the end as P.W.9. JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 Page 5 of 11 - 6 - Besides leading the evidence by examining the above witnesses, the prosecution has also proved several documents which have been admitted in evidence and marked Exts.1 to 15. Out of those; important are the FIR (Ext.6); inquest report (Ext.8); the post mortem report (Ext.1) and the spot map (Ext.7). The Chemical Examiner’s report has been admitted in evidence and marked Ext.15. 6. The accused, having taken the plea of complete denial and false implication, has not tendered any evidence in support of the same. However, in his statement under section 313 Cr.P.C., he has said that he had murdered his wife. 7. Mr.S.K.Tripathy, learned counsel for the Appellant (accused) submitted that the prosecution, in the case, has not tendered any evidence in support of any motive behind the crime. He further submitted that there is no evidence on record to show that the accused, who is the son of the deceased, was having any sort of dispute or dissention with his mother (deceased) for any such reason whatsoever and, therefore, the projected case of the prosecution that the accused committed the murder of his mother appears to be wholly suspicious. He further submitted that when the prosecution, for the purpose of bringing home the charge against the accused, relies upon the evidence of P.Ws.2 & 3, the Trial Court, without putting those to proper JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 Page 6 of 11 - 7 - scrutiny and appreciation thereof, has erred in holding them to be the trustworthy witnesses in fastening the guilt upon the accused for having committed the murder of his mother. He further submitted that it being there in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses that the accused was for some time under treatment for his mental sickness, in the absence of any motive, the possibility is not ruled out that when the real culprit for committing the offence was not found out, the members of the family wanted the accused to be somehow booked in the case. He further submitted that the evidence of P.W.2 when is properly analyzed, it would appear that he is not a trustworthy witness. In view of all these above, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence, which are impugned in this Appeal, cannot be sustained. 8. Mr.S.K.Nayak, learned Additional Government Advocate for the Respondent-State, while supporting the finding of guilt against the accused, as has been returned by the Trial Court, submitted that the evidence of P.Ws.2 & 3 are enough to hold that it is the accused, who is the perpetrator of the crime. He further submitted that when the accused is not coming forward to offer any explanation whatsoever as to how all such happened with his mother when it is the evidence that he was the only other person present in the house that his mother and the uncle (P.W.2) had so seen by him, immediately on his arrival in the house near the JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 Page 7 of 11 - 8 - dead body of the deceased, on such evidence alone, the conviction stands well grounded. He further submitted that the evidence of P.W.3 also provide support in the establishment of the charge against the accused. 9. Keeping in view the submissions made, we have carefully read the impugned judgment of conviction. We have also extensively travelled through the depositions of the witnesses (P.W.1 to P.W.9) and have perused the documents admitted in evidence and marked as Ext.1 to Ext.15. 10. It is the evidence of the Doctor (P.W.5), who had conducted the autopsy over the dead body of the deceased that he had noticed lacerated wound of the size of 2” X ‰” into bone deep transversely over zygoma bone below left eye with open fracture of zygoma. He had also noticed complete thickness lacerated wound of upper lip of size 2’’ X ‰’’ and palpable fracture of the maxilla, mandible and nasal bone and upper and lower teeth with dislocation. It is his evidence that there was a lacerated wound of the size of 3” X ½” X bone thick over forehead with open fracture of the underling frontal bone of skull with brain matter coming out through the opening. He has stated that all these injuries were ante mortem in nature and might have been caused by heavy, hard and blunt object. The evidence of this Doctor coupled with the evidence of P.Ws.2, 3 & others including JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 Page 8 of 11 - 9 - the I.O. (P.W.9), who had held inquest over the dead body of the deceased, which go unquestioned lead us to conclude that Padma met a homicidal death. As per the evidence of P.W.2 (informant), being told by his wife, he went to the house of the accused. He has stated to have seen the accused standing inside the house near the front door and looking furious. He has further stated that seeing the accused in that mood, he was afraid of and ran away to call other villagers. He has further stated that having garnered courage, when with other villagers including Chowkidar came to the house of the accused and then saw Padma (deceased) lying dead and the accused was still inside the house and no one-else was present there. It is stated that the dead body of Padma was lying on the ground with bleeding injury on her head. The witnesses, having been cross-examined at length, we find no such material to have been brought out to disbelieve his arrival in the house of the accused at the first instance as also with the villagers including the Chowkidar subsequently. Although he has stated that the accused had previously been treated for his mental illness as was told by the father of the accused, he does not state that during the relevant period, the accused was having the insanity and not able to understand what he was doing or what others were doing when fact remains that he is the paternal uncle of the accused and is supposed to know from the daily dealings. JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 Page 9 of 11 - 10 - P.W.3 is the father of the accused and the wife of the deceased. He states that in the evening the accused informed him to have killed his mother. During cross-examination, it has been further elicited from him that the accused confessed before him to have committed the murder of his mother (Padma) over telephone. We find absolutely no reason to disbelieve P.W.3, who is none other than the father of the accused. With the above evidence on record, even though we find that the prosecution evidence is not on the score of any motive on the part of the accused to commit said offence, yet that omission, on the face of the evidence on record as already discussed is of no significance. The decision in the case of Nandu Singh -V- State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhatisgarh); 2022 SCC Online SC 1454 cited by the learned counsel for the Appellant (accused), which lays down that the motive plays an important link to complete the chain of circumstances, according to us, has no applicability in the facts and circumstances emanating from the evidence on record. On a conspectus of analysis of the evidence hereinabove, this Court finds that the prosecution has proved the charge against the accused that he has committed the murder of his mother (Padma) beyond reasonable doubt. JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 Page 10 of 11 - 11 - 11.
Decision
In the result, the Appeals stand dismissed. The judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 30th June, 2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuapada in C.T. No.03 of 2011 are hereby confirmed. Since the accused, namely, Jairam Herna @ Jayaram Herna is on bail, he is directed to surrender before the Trial Court forthwith to serve out the sentence. G.Satapathy, J. I Agree. (D. Dash) Judge (G.Satapathy) Judge Basu Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV NAYAK Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Date: 14-Nov-2023 14:12:36 JCRLA No.77/2012 & CRLA No.106/2014 Page 11 of 11