CUTTACK, India, April 18 -- Orissa High Court issued the following order on March 17:

1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.07.2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nuapada in Sessions Case No. 27 of 2007 [arising out of Jonk P.S. Case No. 94/2006 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 357/2006 (TR 310/2007)], whereby the learned trial court convicted the appellant under Section 498-A IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to further suffer R.I. for one month.

2. This appeal is pending since 2009 and none appeared for the appellant on several dates of hearing. Therefore, vide order dated 19.02.2026, this Court requested Mr. Tukuna Kumar Mishra, who was in Court, to assist the Court in the capacity of Amicus Curiae and he has readily accepted the same and after obtaining the entire record, assisted the Court very effectively. He has also filed a detailed written note of submission along with relied upon judgments.

3. Heard Mr. Tukuna Kumar Mishra, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Mr. Sobhan Panigrahi, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State.

4. The prosecution case, in nutshell, is that on 21.11.2006 at 8.00 A.M. the informant Narayan Dhrub lodged a written report at Beltukuri Outpost to the effect that about ten years back his daughter Gayatri married to the accused Maniram at village Bhaleswar. After one year of her marriage the accused subjected her to physical and mental torture. To settle their dispute, meetings were held at different times but the accused continued to torture her. It is alleged that on 20.11.2006 at about 4.00 P.M. one of the villagers of accused informed that Gayatri died. The informant and other relatives rushed to Bhaleswar and came to know that the deceased had consumed poison. The elder brother of Maniram abused them in obscene language and threatened them to assault.

5. On the basis of the written report of the informant (P.W.11), police registered the case and investigation was conducted and charge sheet has been filed in the present case against the accused for the alleged commission of offence u/s.498-A/306 of I.P.C. The accused took a stance of complete denial and claim trial. Accordingly, he was put to trial on the charges, as mentioned above.

6. The prosecution in order to bring home the charges examined as many as nineteen witnesses and exhibited eleven documents. Out of nineteen witnesses, P.Ws.1 and 2 were the witnesses to the seizure; P.Ws.3, 4, 5 and 6 were the independent witnesses; P.W.7 informed the fact of death of deceased to the informant; P.Ws.8 and 10 are the niece of the deceased; P.W.9 was the nurse who took zima of bedhead ticket; P.W.11 was the informant; P.W.12 was the autopsy doctor; P.W.13 is the brother of the deceased; P.W.14 was the headman of Dhrub Samaj; P.W.15 was the President of Dhrub Samaj; and P.Ws.16 to 19 were the I.Os of the present case..

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=%2FbY2dBB1fxliePvWrCseo%2FIqcMAPv7gwq5Zsupmmf1FtNClwaQ5XHAp0o8evHNfI&caseno=CRLA/358/2009&cCode=1&cino=ODHC010372032009&state_code=11&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.