Orissa High Court
K. Khetriya Reddy vs State Of Odisha on 24 July, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLA No. 238 of 2005
K. Khetriya Reddy .... Appellant
-versus-
State of Odisha .... Respondent
Advocates appeared in the cases:
For Appellant : Mr. B. K. Parida, Advocate
For Respondent : Mr. Janmejaya Katikia,
Additional Government Advocate
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
JUDGMENT
24.07.2023
Dr. S. Muralidhar, CJ.
1. On 13th July 2023, learned counsel for the Appellant informed
the Court that the Appellant had been prematurely released but he
wanted to argue the appeal on merits since the Appellant had
been working as a helper in GRIDCO and the conviction if
allowed to stand would affect the prospects of his reinstatement
in service. Accordingly, the appeal is heard finally today.
2. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29th
April, 2005 passed by the Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge,
(First Track Court No. III), Cuttack in Sessions Trial Case No.72
of 2005 convicting the Appellant for the offence punishable
under Section 302 of IPC. The Appellant was charged with
having murdered his wife at around 10 am on 6th May, 2004
following his being in a drunken state and quarreling with his
wife.
3. The case of the prosecution was that after witnessing his
father's assault on his mother (deceased), their teenage son - K.
Srinivas Reddy (PW.2) ran to inform his uncle - K. Bhagaban
Reddy (PW.1) and asked PW.1 to come to the house of the
deceased.
4. The further case of the prosecution was that on coming to the
house, PW.1 found the deceased lying on the ground with
bleeding injuries on her head and also found the Appellant-
accused sitting inside the house in a drunken state. Thereafter, the
FIR was lodged at the instance of PW.1. During investigation, the
sample blood of the deceased and the wearing apparels of both
the deceased and the Appellant were collected. On completion of
the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against the Appellant
for the aforementioned offences.
5. During the trial, both PWs.1 and 2 turned hostile by claiming
that they were not aware of how the deceased had died on 6th
May, 2004. Both of them claimed that the Appellant and the
deceased were leaving peacefully and that the deceased also used
to consume alcohol. However, what is interesting is that after
both these witnesses were declared hostile and the prosecutor was
allowed to put leading questions to them, both of them admitted
that they found the Appellant in the house where the deceased
was lying on the ground dead. Therefore, the presence of the
Appellant in the house at the time of the death of the deceased
was confirmed by these two witnesses viz., PWs.1 and 2.
6. As far as the death being homicidal is concerned, this stood
confirmed by the deposition of PW.9 Dr. Braja kishore Dash, he
found multiple cut and abrasion wounds on the body of the
deceased. On dissection under the surface of the scalp, contusion
was found in the parietal reasons and whole of the occipital area.
His opinion was very clear that all the injuries were ante-mortem
and that external injuries 1 to 5, 11 to 13 and their corresponding
internal injuries could have been caused by hard and blunt
objects, whereas external injuries 6 to 10 could have been caused
by sharp cutting weapon. There was hardly on the cross-
examination of PW.9 except the vague suggestion that injuries
might have been caused by fall on broken glass, which he denied.
It was, therefore, confirmed that the death was homicidal.
7. Turning next to the Serological Examination Report, it is seen
that the wearing apparels of the accused i.e. his full pant and full
shirt (H.1 and H.2 respectively) were found to contain human
blood of Group-A. The saya (G2) worn by the deceased also
contained blood stains of Group-A. The sample blood taken from
the deceased was also of Group-A. This was therefore another
clinching piece of evidence connecting the Appellant with the
crime.
8. Then we have Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
which states that "when any fact is especially within the
knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon
him." Learned Additional Government Advocate has drawn
attention of this Court to the decision of the Supreme Court of
India in Jayantilal Verma v. State of Madhya Pradesh 2021 12
SCC 71, where the conviction was upheld by invoking Section
106 of the Indian Evidence Act and in particular the decision in
Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra, 2006 10 SCC
681. In that case, the Court noted "the most important aspect is
where the death was caused and the body found. It was in the
precincts of the house of the Appellant herein where there were
only family members staying." In the present case too, apart from
a bare denial of all the circumstances put to him under Section
313 Cr PC, the Appellant has no reasonable explanation to offer
about he is being present in the dwelling house in a drunken state
along with the body of the deceased, with no one else being there
and her suffering the homicidal death. With the medical evidence
as well as the Serological Examination Report confirming the
presence of human blood of Group-A on the wearing apparels of
the Appellant, again for which he has no explanation, there can
be no doubt that all of these circumstances point unerringly to the
guilt of the Appellant and the Appellant alone.
9. Consequently, this Court is not persuaded to interfere with the
impugned judgment of the learned trial Court confirming the
conviction awarded to the Appellant.
10. It will be noted at the outset that the Appellant was in fact
enlarged on bail by an order dated 25th April, 2019 passed by this
Court during the pendency of the present appeal. This Court
clarifies that since the Appellant has been prematurely released,
he will not be taken into custody as a result of the present
judgment. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
\
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(G. Satapathy)
Judge
M.Panda
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: MRUTYUNJAYA PANDA
Designation: Secretary
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 25-Jul-2023 14:49:27
