Premananda v. State
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court允许 an appeal challenging convictions under Sections 498-A and 306 IPC. It set aside the judgment, finding no reliable evidence of cruelty or instigation of suicide, and clarified that the presumption under Section 113-A was untenable.
What did the court decide?
The impugned judgment of conviction and sentence is set aside. The appellants are set at liberty and their bail bonds are discharged.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
CRA NO.316 OF 1995
(From the judgment and order dated 22nd December, 1995 passed by learned Asst. Sessions Judge, Patnagarh in S.C. No.90/8 of 1995.
Premananda Dip and others
… Appellants
-versus-
State of Odisha … Respondent
Advocates appeared in the case through hybrid mode:
For Appellants : Mr.Amitav Tripathy,
Advocate
-versus-
For Respondent : Mr.S.K.Mishra,
Addl. Standing Counsel
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM:
JUSTICE SASHIKANTA MISHRA
JUDGMENT
16.03.2023.
CRA No.316 of 1995 Page 1 of 11
Sashikanta Mishra,J . The Appellant No.2 (Kunja Dip), it is submitted, has died in the mean time. The appeal against him stands abated.
2 . The Appellants have challenged the judgment passed by learned Asst. Sessions Judge, Patnagarh in S. C. No.90/8 of 1995 whereby they were convicted for the offence under Sections 498-A/306/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for three years under Section 498-A and 8 years under Section 306 of I.P.C. with fine of Rs.1,000/- on each count, in default, to undergo further R.I. for six months and one month respectively. Both the sentences are directed to run concurrently.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court's conviction under Section 498-A and 306 IPC for instigation of suicide given undisputed discrepancies in prosecution evidence regarding cr
Whether the explanation of the defence that the deceased committed suicide due to mental depression from childlessness is more probable than the unproven prosecution case.
Whether the presumption under Section 113-A of the Evidence Act applies given the delay in filing the FIR and lack of evidence regarding the time of marriage and suicide.
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Premananda Dip and others
- respondent
State of Odisha
Coram
Sashikanta Mishra
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court