'Honour Killing Not Rarest Of Rare, Happening In Society': Odisha Court Sentences Parents To Life Who Murdered & Burnt Minor Daughter

A Sessions Court in Odisha has convicted and sentenced parents of a minor girl to imprisonment for life for committing her murder, burning her dead body and disposing the ashes emanating therefrom in a river in order to screen the evidence.

The Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge (FTSC-II), Jajpur Bijaya Kumar Jena further found this to be a 'honour killing' but stopped short of dubbing it as a 'rarest of rare' case, observing that such type of offences are (often) taking place in the society.

“Since this case does not come under the category of rarest of rare case and such type of honour killing is taking place in the society, I sentence both the convicts Nakula Jena and Sanju Jena to undergo imprisonment for life,” he reasoned.

Case Background

A lady co-villager of the accused persons lodged a report before the Inspector-in-Charge (IIC), Binjharpur police station informing that on the night of 14.02.2016, she heard the sound of crying from the house of her accused-neighbour for which she and other neighbours came out of their respective houses. She heard the deceased girl requesting her accused-father to spare her and assured that she would not keep physical relation with 'X' (another accused).

It was further alleged that after a few moments, there was no noise anymore. On the following morning, she said, the accused parents along with some other co-villagers cremated the dead corpse of the deceased in a dried pond situated at the backside of their house. After cremation, they allegedly packed the ashes in two plastic bags and threw it in a nearby river.

Upon receipt of such information, an FIR was registered against the accused persons under Section 302/201/34 of the IPC. After completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against a number of accused persons, including the parents. The accused person, who allegedly had illicit relationship with the deceased, was implicated under Section 376(2)(i)/201 IPC read with Section 6 POCSO Act. The Court framed charges against them and upon denial of guilt, trial was held to establish the same.

Findings as to guilt of accused persons

The Court recorded the depositions of thirty prosecution witnesses. The preliminary question which arose for consideration was whether the victim was indeed a minor at the time of the unfortunate incident. In this regard, the school admission register of the deceased was produced by the headmaster which indicated the date of birth to be 03.10.2000. Thus, the Court was of the opinion that the deceased was around 15 years old; hence, a minor.

Most of the prosecution witnesses, while being examined before the Court, stated that the deceased died about eight years back but expressed their ignorance about the manner in which the offence was committed. Therefore, they were declared hostile under Section 154 of the Evidence Act.

Significantly, the informant also stated that she was not present at the place of occurrence during the relevant point of time. She further stated that she had affixed her left thumb impression (LTI) on a blank paper, which was subsequently filled up by someone else, basing upon which the FIR was formally registered. It was her further version that the contents of the FIR were not read over to her.

Another witness stated that the parents of the deceased confessed before the police to have killed their daughter and hung her body to portray the death as suicide, and then burnt the body in the backside of their house after which they collected the ashes and disposed of the same in a river. He also proved the leading to discovery statement given by the accused-parents basing upon which certain incriminating materials were recovered.

Apart from the above, one of the investigating officers spoke about the confession made by the parents as to murder of their daughter. He also deposed about the discovery of incriminating articles as per the leading to discovery statements of the accused under Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

On close scrutiny of the evidence of the witnesses coupled with the disclosure statements of accused leading seizure of relevant incriminatory materials, the Court reached a definite conclusion that the parents committed murder of the deceased in the night of 14.02.2016 and cremated her dead body by setting it on fire in a dry pond situated at the backside of their house. It was satisfied that they threw away the burnt ashes and remnant bones of the deceased in a river.

Furthermore, the accused-parents failed to provide any satisfactory explanation in their statements recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC. The Court made it clear that the burden was upon them under Section 106 of the Evidence Act to explain the circumstances under which the deceased died and what happened to her dead body.

“Their bald denial plea in their statements U/s 313 Cr.P.C does come to their rescue in the facts and circumstances of this case particularly when the aforementioned independent witnesses such as p.Ws.9 and 12 have supported to the prosecution case lending corroboration to the evidence of preliminary Investigating Officer P.W.30.”

Accordingly, the parents of the deceased girl were held guilty under Section 302/201 not only for her murder but also for destroying the evidence/dead body. However, the Court did not find any cogent evidence as to the participation of other co-villagers in the said crime. Therefore, they were acquitted of all the charges.

The Court further recorded that there was no evidence against the accused who was charge-sheeted for having sexual intercourse with the deceased/victim. Accordingly, it acquitted him of the charges under Section 376(2)(i)/201 of the IPC read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

Honour killing not 'rarest of rare'

So far as the sentence is concerned, the Court, without discussing any aggravating or mitigating circumstances, directly came to the conclusion that 'honour killing' does not come under 'rarest of rare' category of offence warranting the extreme punishment of death. It further noted that such kind of offences (honour killings) is taking place in the society.

Accordingly, it did not deem it pertinent to impose the sentence of death upon both the accused persons, instead it sentenced them to life for offence under Section 302 IPC, along with fines. They were also sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years for offence under Section 201 IPC.

Case Title: State of Odisha v. Nakula Jena & Ors.

Case No: C.T Spl. G.R POCSO No.36 of 2016

Click Here To Read/Download Order