0

The learned trial court has failed to make an analytical discussion of the evidence adduced on record: High Court of Orissa

The prosecution had not bothered to produce the weapon of offence before the learned trial court. Such an opinion was held by The Hon’ble High Court of Orissa before The Hon’ble Chief Justice B.P. Routray in the case of Suduru @ Sudarsan Gouda Vs. State of Orissa [CRLA No.473 of 2014]. 

The facts of the case were associated with the appellant Suduru @ Sudarsan Gouda who had been sentenced to life imprisonment for commission of an offence under Section 302 of the I.P.C. by the learned Special Judge-cum-2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Berhampur. It was reported that the appellant detained the autorickshaw; where the deceased Raghumani Das and his wife Bangali Das was in, who was a resident of village Balarampur and belonged to the scheduled caste community and so was the appellant; attempted to kill the wife by a knife. Later, after reaching home the deceased with his wife and daughter went to the pond for disinfection. Later the wife after reaching home received news from Naba Das of their village that the appellant stabbed Raghumani Das with a knife near the village library. 

F.I.R was lodged by Harihar Sahu. The investigation was carried. The dead body and sent dead body for post-mortem examination to MKCG Medical College and Hospital, Berhampur. The Appellant faced trial taking the plea of innocence. During the proceedings, the prosecution examined thirteen witnesses and marked eighteen documents as Exhibits. Further, The trial court upon conclusion of the trial found him guilty for the charge under Section 302 of the I.P.C. but acquitted him from the offence under the SC & ST (PoA) Act. As seen from the evidence of P.Ws.1, 4 and 5, they were the post occurrence witnesses, who had admitted that they had not seen the alleged assault. From a thorough analysis of the evidence of P.Ws.1, 2, 3, 4 & 5, nothing can be taken to implicate the Appellant as the author of the crime. The prosecution did not bring further against the appellant. No motive on the part of the Appellant has been suggested or attributed against the appellant for causing any murderous assault on the deceased.

The Hon’ble Court stated that “… In view of the discussions made above, it is thus concluded that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge of murder against the Appellant beyond all reasonable doubts. Accordingly, the impugned judgment conviction dated 21st February, 2014 is set aside and the Appellant is acquitted from the charges. He is held not guilty for the charge under Section 302 of the I.P.C. and directed to be released forthwith from the custody, if his detention is not required in any other case. The appeal is allowed.”

Click here to read the Judgment

Judgment reviewed by Bipasha Kundu

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat