Trial Court Verdict Is 'Sheer Moral Conviction': Orissa High Court Acquits Two Death Row Convicts In Triple Murder Case

The Orissa High Court on Monday (July 21) acquitted two persons who were convicted by the trial Court for committing murder of three members of a family in 2017, including a minor boy, by fatally slitting their throats.While setting aside not only the death penalty but the entire conviction in toto, the Division Bench of Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo and Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra termed the decision of the Additional Sessions Judge as a “sheer moral conviction” and further observed –“The reasoning assigned by the learned trial Court in convicting the appellants seems to be based on conjecture and suspicion which has got no place in the matter of legal proof of guilt of accused persons in a criminal trial and we are of the view that the impugned verdict is nothing but a sheer moral conviction. Thus we hold that the prosecution has failed to establish the charges against the appellants beyond all reasonable doubt.”The informant, who is the brother of the deceased Biranchi Naik, lodged an FIR informing about discovery of the dead body of the deceased Tarani Naik (wife of the deceased Biranchi Naik) near their house. He also informed that the deceased Biranchi and the deceased Ekalabya Naik (minor 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 of the Arms Act.The trial Court had taken into account 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).Based on last seen theory, DNA report and evidence pertaining to leading to discovery, the Court had found the appellants guilty under Section 302 of the IPC for murder, Section 364 for kidnapping the minor deceased from the lawful custody of his guardians and under Section 201 for disappearance of evidence. They were handed down the capital punishment for murder of the deceased persons, apart from sentences for other offences.Motive & last seen theory unreliableThe High Court examined two possible motives outlined by the prosecution, viz (i) to commit robbery of an amount which the deceased had obtained in loan, (ii) political hostility between the parties. The Court upheld the view of the trial Court which did not find the appellants guilty of robbery. So far as political rivalry was concerned, certain discrepancies in the evidence of the witnesses were held to be constraints in proving the motive. Thus, no motive could be proved.Though a shop-keeper (P.W.37) deposed to have seen the deceased Biranchi for the last time in the company of the appellants, but such testimony could not satisfy the scrutiny of the Court, which held such evidence to be unreliable. The Court specifically highlighted that in the absence of evidence suggesting proper lighting facility which could have helped the witness to recognise the deceased/appellants coupled with a long period between the incident and recording of testimony, it is not safe to rely on his testimony.Tampering with seized materials can't be ruled outCertain incriminating materials, including blood-stained weapon of offence and wearing materials and a motorcycle, were seized by the police as per the evidence of the appellants under Section 27 of the Evidence Act. However, the Court discarded such evidence as there was nothing to show that those were sealed after seizure. Furthermore, there was an unexplained delay of about two months between seizure and production before Court requesting chemical examination.Justice Sahoo, who authored the judgment, opined that these are glaring lapses on the part of the investigation agency, which create a reasonable doubt against the safe custody of the exhibits and that there was no chance of tampering with the same.“The order does not indicate that the unsealed exhibits which were produced, were sealed in Court. It does not indicate that the learned Magistrate verified the conditions of the seals given in some exhibits. No seal was produced before the Magistrate for its comparison with the seals given in some exhibits,” he observed.DNA evidence not reliableThe Court cited a number of decisions of the Supreme Court, including the recent case of Kattavellai @ v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 703 relating to the proper appreciation of DNA evidence in criminal prosecutions. As per the principles culled out from the settled precedents, the Court was of the view that after noting down the findings of DNA test report, the trial Court hastily “jumped” to the...

Trial Court Verdict Is 'Sheer Moral Conviction': Orissa High Court Acquits Two Death Row Convicts In Triple Murder Case

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

Tags