'Rarest Of Rare Case': Odisha Court Awards Death Penalty To Two For Murder Of Three Members Of Family By Slitting Throats
A Sessions Court in Odisha's Angul district sentenced two men to the extreme penalty of death for committing murder of three members of a family by slitting their throats. Terming the case to be 'rarest of rare', the Additional Sessions Judge of Athmallik Mr. Laxminarayan Ray Choudhury held –
“Such type of colorful murder usually nowhere seen without enmity. Rather in a friendly manner the accused persons committed murder in a colourable way to get the huge cash received on loan by deceased Biranchi.”
Factual Background
The informant, who is the brother of the deceased Biranchi Nayak, lodged an FIR informing about discovery of the dead body of the deceased Tarani Nayak (wife of the deceased Biranchi Nayak) near their house. He also informed that the deceased Biranchi and the deceased Ekalabya Nayak (son of the deceased Biranchi & Tarani) were untraceable.
Basing on the FIR, the police registered a case against unknown persons and commenced investigation. Upon completion of the investigation, it filed charge-sheet against both the accused persons under Sections 302/449/363/364/394/201/34 of the IPC read with Sections 25 & 27, the Arms Act.
Upon informed about the charges, both the accused persons took the plea of false implication and pleaded innocence. Accordingly, the trial was initiated and questions of law were framed. The prosecution examined as many as 41 witnesses, except proving documents as exhibits and producing material objects.
Court's Observations
The Court considered the post-mortem as well as query reports obtained from the doctors, who conducted autopsy on the dead bodies of the deceased persons. All the three doctors opined that the deaths of the deceased persons were ante-mortem in nature and were caused due to deep sharp cut injury to the throats of the deceased. They also opined that the said injuries could have been caused by the seized weapon (katari).
To ascertain motive behind the crime, the Court took into account the evidence of a witness, i.e. PW-36 who had deposed that on 07.10.2017, one of the accused persons had come to the house of deceased Biranchi and inquired about the loan amount which the deceased had received from one Self Help Group (SHG).
He also deposed that one of the accused persons had also come to the house of the deceased on 08.10.2017 and 09.10.2017.
“At that time accused Ranja asked Tarani regarding purchase of motor cycle after receipt of money and she replied that her husband already gone to Kishorenagar to repay the loan and she does not know regarding the purchase of motor cycle (at para-4 & 5 of P.W.36). From the above version of P.W.36, it is crystal clear there was clear intention to snatch away cash from Biranchi Nayak to which he has received from Maa Maheswari SHG group on loan,” the Court observed.
Apart from the above, the Court found two other evidence to be relevant for this case, i.e. last seen theory and the DNA report. One of the witnesses, a grocery shop owner, had deposed to have seen the deceased Biranchi with both the accused persons in between 09:00 PM to 09:30 PM on 09.10.2017 and notably, the dead body of the said deceased was found in the following morning.
“From above evidence of P.W.37 it is very clear that with intention to murder Biranchi, Ranja took the assistance of Prakash and they both moved through a motor cycle and purchased liquor in order to commit murder of Biranchi in a pre-planned manner. So very portion of evidence clearly justifies their criminal intention, preparation and commission of murder of Biranchi,” the Court held.
The Court also considered the confessional statements of the accused persons under Section 27 of the Evidence Act so far as discovery of the weapon of offence and blood-stained wearing apparels was concerned.
Further, the Court also examined the DNA reports which indicated that the blood stains found on the seized weapon of offence matched with that of deceased Ekalabya. Similarly, blood stains found from the cut piece of napkin of accused Prakash Behera matched with that of deceased Ekalabya and blood stains found from the cut piece of the pant of the accused Nandakishore matched with that of the deceased Biranchi.
“From the above scientific analysis of DNA report it is crystal clear that both the accused persons has the involvement in the alleged murder of deceased Biranchi Nayak and Naba @ Ekalabya Nayak,” it held.
The Court, accordingly, came to the conclusion that the aforesaid circumstances form a complete chain of 'motive-preparation-commission of crime' and leave no room for doubt that the accused persons committed the murders of the deceased persons.
Considering the evidence on record, the Court found both the accused persons guilty of offence under Section 364 of the IPC for kidnapping the minor deceased Ekalabya from the lawful custody of his guardians. They were also held liable under Section 201, IPC for disappearance of evidence.
However, they were held not guilty for the offences under Sections 363 (abduction)/394 (robbery)/34 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act.
Hearing on Question of Sentence
The Additional Sessions Judge heavily relied upon the 'rarest of rare' circumstances enumerated by the Supreme Court in the case Machhi Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab. Examining the facts of the case in the light of those circumstances, the Court held –
“Taking essence of doctrine of rarest of rare case it is found that this present case falling under so many categories such as: 1. commission of murder of innocent child; 2. commission of murder of helpless woman; 3. case of multiple murder; and 4. cold blooded murder incorporating a thoughtful design in order to get control to inherit property or for any other selfish gains.”
Accordingly, the Court held the case to be a rarest of rare and awarded the extreme sentence of death to both the accused persons. It also sentenced them to various terms under Sections 364 and 201 of the IPC. Furthermore, it ordered the State to pay a compensation amount to the tune of Rs. 30 lakhs to the minor daughter of the deceased Biranchi and Tarani, who was barely 1.5 year-old at the time of offence.
Peculiarly, the Court hailed the prosecution for its success in bringing home the case and asked the Home Department of the Government of Odisha to confer some rewards on it for 'taking pain' for the protection of social interest.
Case Title: State v. Prakash Behera & Anr.
Case No: CT(S) No. 16 of 2018
Date of Judgment: September 27, 2024
Counsel for the State: Mr. Pradeep Kumar Das, Public Prosecutor
Counsel for the Accused Persons: Mr. P. Pradhan, State Defence Counsel