Kalia @ Babula Singh vs State Of Orissa

The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 31st July, 2009 passed by the Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj, Baripada in S.T. Case No.204 of 2007 convicting the Appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default to undergo RI for one month.

The case of the prosecution was that the Appellant was married to the daughter of the deceased. His wife had left him three years prior to the incident and was staying with her mother, i.e., the deceased. On 13th March, 2007 at around 3 pm, the Appellant came to the house of the deceased where she was along with her grandson Bapun Singh (PW-9) who at that time was four years old. The appellant caught hold of the top of the hair of the deceased and assaulted her with an axe (budia) on her neck and head region and she died on the spot.

The star witness of the prosecution was PW-9 who also happened to be a child witness. As noticed in the para-10 of the impugned judgment of the trial Court PW 9 was six years old by the time he was examined by the prosecution at the trial. He could give rational answers to the general questions put by the Court. Although he was not administered oath, he was very clear and cogent about what he had seen on the fateful day. Despite cross-examination, the veracity of his testimony could not be shaken.

As rightly noted by the trial Court, the evidence of a child witness has to be approached with caution. The Court must seek independent corroboration of such evidence.

In the present case, the medical evidence of Dr. Sudhir Ranjan Das (PW-7), who conducted the post-mortem of the deceased, completely corroborates the eye-witness testimony of PW-9. There were two incised wounds on the left side of the neck and over the scalp on the right side respectively. These, by themselves were enough to cause death in the normal course. The opinion of the doctor that the death was homicidal remained unshaken in cross-examination.

With the aforementioned evidence of the child witness being fully corroborated by the medical evidence, the trial Court was justified in accepting and making it the basis for convicting the present Appellant.

Having heard Mr. Rabindra Nath Nayak, learned counsel appearing for the Appellant and Mr. Janmejaya Katikia, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, the Court finds that this is an open-and-shut case with the eye-witness testimony of the grandson of the deceased being fully corroborated by the medical evidence.

There is absolutely no scope for interference with the impugned judgment of the trial Court. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

A copy of this judgment be sent forthwith to the concerned Jail Superintendent who will in turn hand it over to the Appellant and also explain its contents to him.

………………………………