Research › Browse › Judgment

Orissa High Court · body

1994 DIGILAW 361 (ORI)

SHYAMA GOUDE v. STATE OF ORISSA

1994-11-30

D.M.PATNAIK, K.L.ISSRANI

body1994
K. L. ISSRANI, J. ( 1 ) THE present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 9th January, 1991 passed by the Sessions Judge, Koraput, Jaypore case Naurangpur in Sessions Case No. 152 of 1990. The accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced for life under Section 302 I. P. C. ( 2 ) PROSECUTION case is that accused Shyama Gauda and Matiram Gouda, the deceased are residents of village Chikili under Qabugaon Police Station. About one month previous to the occurrence the accused brought and kept Komala Gouduni (P. W. 2) the daughter of the deceased, in his house as is wife. It is said that on the date of occurrence i. e. on 25. 3. 1990 the accused picked up quarrel with Komala Gouduni because she did not cook rice. As no rice was available, Kamala brought rice from somewhere else and cooked. Again as curry was not served along with rice, the accused picked up quarrel. At this Kamala went to her fathers house and complained about the attitude of the accused. Matiram Gauda came to the house of the accused along with Komala and chastised the accused and asked him not to quarrel with his daughter. By then it was already dark. When deceased Matiram started to go back to his house, the accused became angry because of the shining, picked up the spear (Barchha), M. O. I. and followed Matiram Gouda. Apprehending danger Komala also followed the accused. On the Sic in front of the verandah of the house of Balaram Gouda the accused had pierced the left side neck of Motiram with the pointed edge of the spear. Komala Gouduni atonce snatched away the spear apprehending further blow from the accused. Matiram Gouda fell down with bleeding injury over his neck and died Instantaneously. The accused ran away from the spot. On hearing the cries of Komala Gouduni, Mangum Gouda (P. W. 1) came to the spot and learnt about the incident. He then called other witnesses. The accused was brought to the spot and on being questioned he made extra-judicial confession. Mangum Gouda along with others then took the accused to Dabugaon P. S. where F. I. R. (Ext. 5) was lodged. During investigation besides the formalities of inquest, post-mortem, seizure of blood-stained wearing clothes of the deceased. He then called other witnesses. The accused was brought to the spot and on being questioned he made extra-judicial confession. Mangum Gouda along with others then took the accused to Dabugaon P. S. where F. I. R. (Ext. 5) was lodged. During investigation besides the formalities of inquest, post-mortem, seizure of blood-stained wearing clothes of the deceased. M. O. I. spear and the wearing lungi and Banian of the accused were also seized. The Chemical Examinerts report revised existence of blood on the spear. ( 3 ) THE defence plea of the accused-appellant is one of complete denial. According to his, he has been falsely implicated in this case. ( 4 ) CONVICTION of the appellant is based on the following circumstances: The direction evidence of P. W. 2 who admittedly was living with the accused-appellant as his wife and also the extra judicial confession by the accused-appellant before P. Ws. 3 and 4. The submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the extra judicial confession was at the time when the accused-appellant was tied up by the villagers and it was under duress and could not have been believed. Regarding the statement of P. W. 2, the submission is that she is an interested witness and daughter of the deceased. She is not reliable to be believed. The third submission that in the inquest report Ext. 1, the injury is said to have been caused by the iron rod whereas the M. O. I. seized is Barchha and not the iron rod. ( 5 ) THE trial Court has considered the fact of extra judicial confusion and has come to a finding that the confession made by the accused-appellant was not under any duress. Relying on (Sadananda Singi v. State) the Court has accepted the extra judicial confession where he has confessed before the witnesses that he had killed the deceased with the spear. ( 6 ) P. W. 2 has stated that the accused-appellant started quarrel with her for food. There was nm-ice available in the house. The accused picked up quarrel and that she brought rice and cooked. But as no curry could be prepared he picked up quarrel with her. Then she rushed to the house of her father which was in the same village. Her father came and asked the accused as to why they were quarrelling. There was nm-ice available in the house. The accused picked up quarrel and that she brought rice and cooked. But as no curry could be prepared he picked up quarrel with her. Then she rushed to the house of her father which was in the same village. Her father came and asked the accused as to why they were quarrelling. When her father started returning to his house, the accused-appellant ran after him holding a Barchha, M. O. I. In front of the house of one Balaram Gouda, the accused pierced the Barchha into the neck of his father-in-law. When he was about to give his another blow, she (P. W. 2) snatched the Barchha from the accused and the accused ran away from the place. P. W. 6, the Medical Officer, Dabugaon P. W. who conducted the post-mortem examination found one punctured wound on the left side of the neck in the supra clavicular fossa near the medial end of left clavicle of 2 cm. x 1 c. m. x 8 c. m. in size. According to the doctor. P. W. 6, muscles of the neck punctured the root of the great vessels of the neck and upper labs of the right lung was punctured. According to the opinion of the doctor, the death was due to uneontrolled internal haemmorhage on artistries of the neck, and that the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Ext. 9/1 is the opinion. ( 7 ) LOOKING to the nature of weapon and the injuries caused on the person of the deceased, we find that no other offence except the offence under section 302 I. P. C. is made out. We, therefore confirm the findings arrive at by the Court: below and no interference in the findings arrived at is called for. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Appeal dismissed.