Dismissed

State of Orissa v. Sanatan Pradhan

Orissa HC11 Jul 2023CRLLP/74/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the State's leave to appeal against a Sessions Judge's judgment acquitting an accused of murder (Section 302 IPC) while convicting him of rape (Section 376 IPC), finding no error in the trial Court's assessment of evidence regarding the cause of death.

What did the court decide?

Leave to appeal against the impugned judgment acquitting the respondent of Section 302 IPC is denied.

State of Orissa Vs Sanatan Pradhan — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Orissa HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRLLP No.74 of 2006

¶3

State of Orissa …. Petitioner

¶4

Mr. G. N. Rout, Additional Standing Counsel -versus-

¶5

Sanatan Pradhan

¶6

…. Opposite Party

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE G. SATAPATHY

ORDER

Order No.

11.07.2023

The State seeks leave to appeal against the impugned judgment dated 23^rd December, 2005 passed by the Sessions Judge, Phulbani in S.T. No.96 of 2002 to the extent that it has acquitted the Opposite Party of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC while convicting him of the offence under Section 376 IPC and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for seven years.

¶14

The original story of the prosecution was that after the Opposite Party had raped the deceased, she, out of shame, committed suicide by hanging. However, after the prosecution evidence was closed, the affidavits of C.Ws.1 and 2 were produced before the Assistant Sessions Judge in which they claimed that they had seen the accused and his father pressing the neck of the deceased and hanging her on the branch of a tree with a napkin, which belonged to the Opposite Party-accused.

¶15

Page 1 of 1

¶16

Not only were the deponents of the two affidavits not examined but the prosecution was also unable to prove that the napkin belonged to the Opposite Party.

¶17

It was then sought to be suggested that the photographs of the deceased hanging from the tree showed that her toes were touching the ground and, therefore, it was the accused who first strangulated her and then hung her on the tree. The trial Court rejected this argument as well after noting that the photographs were taken much after the death and by that time the weight of the dead body must have itself increased to an extent that the dead body hanging from the tree touched the ground.

¶18

Having carefully examined the evidence on record with the assistance of the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, the Court is unable to be persuaded that the trial Court has erred in acquitting the Opposite Party of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC while convicting him of the offence under Section 376 IPC. No grounds have been made out for grant of leave to appeal against the impugned judgment of the trial Court. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.

¶19

(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice

(G. Satapathy)

Judge

M. Panda

Signature Not Verified

¶24

Digitally Signed Signed by: MRUTYUNJAYA PANDA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 12-Jul-2023 17:10:00

¶25

Page 2 of 2

State of Orissa v. Sanatan Pradhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Orissa v. Sanatan Pradhan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dillip Ku.Behera Vs State

Naba Behera Vs State

Dillip Ku.Das Vs State

State Vs Manoj Kumar Pradhan

State Vs Sushant Nahak

State Vs Subash Ch.Parida