Orissa High Court
State Of Orissa vs Debendra Naik And Another on 21 June, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLLP No.5 of 2011
State of Orissa ... Petitioner
Mr. J. Katikia, A.G.A.
-versus-
Debendra Naik and another ... Opposite Parties
Mr. Sudipto Panda, Advocate
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER
Order No. 21.06.2023
06. 1. The State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 27th
July 2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Koraput at Jeypore in CT
Case No.123 of 2007 and 135 of 2008 arising out of Kakiriguma
P.S. Case No.28 of 2006 corresponding to G.R. Case Nos.143 of
2006 and 143 of 2006 (A) acquitting the Opposite Parties of the
charges under Section 302/201/34 of IPC.
2. The case of the prosecution was that arising out of a quarrel over
contract funds both the Opposite Parties had with a common intent
caused the death of the deceased Hasio Khosla and later caused the
evidence to disappear.
3. The Court has carefully examined the impugned judgment of the
trial court with the assistance of Mr. J. Katikia, learned Additional
Government Advocate for the State. To bring home the theory of
"last seen", the prosecution relied on P.Ws.1, 4, 5, 7 and 10. Both
P.W 5 and P.W.6 turned hostile. While P.W. 7 could talk of the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 22-Jun-2023 11:58:13
one of the accused Debendra being present with the deceased at 10
am in the morning of occurrence, there was no evidence in that
regard. As far as co-accused Opposite Party No.2-Satyadan Khora
was concerned, there was no such evidence. Even in respect of
Opposite Party No.1-Debendra Naik, the evidence only showed he
was last seen much prior to 3 pm and not proximate to that hour.
This was significant since the death is stated to have occurred
between 3 and 4 PM. Both the accused were in fact found near the
body of the deceased with the motorcycle lying over the body of
the deceased. Apart from this weak piece of last seen evidence, the
prosecution failed to seize the wearing apparels of the deceased or
trace out the weapon of offence. There was no chemical
examination of the belongings of the deceased which could have
connected the accused to the crime.
4. Overall, therefore, the evidence did not inspire confidence and
did not bring home the guilt of the accused.
5. Having carefully examined the evidence again with the help of
learned Additional Government Advocate for the State- Petitioner,
the Court is not satisfied that any error has been committed by the
trial court in the impugned judgment. There is accordingly no
merit in the present petition. The CRLLP is dismissed.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(G. Satapathy)
Judge
S.K. Guin
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 22-Jun-2023 11:58:13
