Orissa High Court
State Of Orissa vs Chanchala Tandi on 21 June, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRLLP No.4 of 2011
State of Orissa ... Petitioner
Mr. G.N. Rout, A.S.C.
-versus-
Chanchala Tandi ... Opposite Party
Proxy counsel on behalf of
Mr. U. Barik, Advocate
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY
ORDER
Order No. 21.06.2023
05. 1. The State seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 27th
November 2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge,
Nuapada in Sessions Case No.24 of 2007 acquitting the Opposite
Party-accused for the offence under Section 302 IPC.
2. The Opposite Party along with her husband Nabin Tandi were
charged with committing the murder of one Makaru Tandi, the
elder brother of Nabin by causing him cut injuries and lathi blows
as a result of which he died on the spot.
3. During the pendency of the trial, the husband of the Opposite
Party, Nabin Tandi expired having committed suicide by burning
himself in jail custody. Therefore, the Opposite Party alone faced
the trial.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SUBASH KUMAR GUIN
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 22-Jun-2023 11:58:13
4. There were two eye-witnesses projected by the prosecution. One
was P.W.1, who happened to be the mother of the deceased.
However, in her examination, it transpired that she had poor vision
and the occurrence occurred on a dark night. She also denied
statements made by her previously to the Police. Consequently,
P.W.1 turned hostile and did not support the case of the
prosecution.
5. That only left P.W.7, wife of the deceased, who in her
deposition mentioned the fact that the quarrel was over a cow dung
basket and in the morning of the occurrence, when an altercation
took place between the deceased and Nabin, the present accused
i.e., the wife of Nabin, in fact prevented Nabin from attacking his
elder brother, the deceased. Then for the second time, an
altercation took place and Nabin is said to have attacked the
deceased with a trident causing the fatal injuries while the present
accused is stated to have assaulted the deceased with a lathi.
6. On an analysis of the evidence, the trial court came to the
conclusion that due the conduct of the Opposite Party and the
nature of weapon attributed to her, she ought to be given the
benefit of doubt.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having
carefully examined the evidence on record, the Court is satisfied
that no error has been committed by the trial court in giving the
Opposite Party the benefit of doubt. It was based on a correct
analysis of the evidence led by the prosecution.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SUBASH KUMAR GUIN
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 22-Jun-2023 11:58:13
8. It appears that the main assailant was in fact the husband of the
present Opposite Party who was in fact prevented by her from
attacking the deceased when a similar altercation took place in the
morning of the occurrence. Moreover, the weapon used by the
main assailant was a sharp-edged one which resulted in bleeding
injuries on the deceased.
9. Consequently, the trial court was justified in granting the present
Opposite Party the benefit of doubt.
10. For the aforementioned reasons, the Court finds no ground
made out for grant of leave to appeal against the impugned
judgment of the trial court. The CRLLP is accordingly dismissed.
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(G. Satapathy)
Judge
S.K. Guin
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SUBASH KUMAR GUIN
Designation: Personal Assistant
Reason: Authentication
Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack
Date: 22-Jun-2023 11:58:13
