- (1.) In all, there are two accused in this case namely Dr. Arbind Kumar and Nishi Rani Kerketta (wife of deceased Dr. Sharad Soreng). Dr. Arbind Kumar stands convicted for the charge of section 302 I.P.C, 201 I.P.C and also under Section 120-B I.P.C for being a party to the criminal conspiracy to commit murder of Dr. Sharad Soreng. Nishi Rani Kerketta is held guilty for the offence under section 302 I.P.C read with Section 120-B I.P.C for conspiring with her co-accused Dr. Arbind Kumar to commit murder of her husband Dr. Sharad Soreng. Being aggrieved of the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence dated 4th December, 2012, both the accused have filed their two separate appeals, viz. Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 62/2015 filed by Nishi Rani Kerketta and Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 74/2015 by Dr. Arbind Kumar. Both are now praying for suspension of sentence during the pendency of the appeal.
(2.) At the very outset, Mr. Tripathy, learned Senior Counsel, submits that he does not press the prayer for suspension of sentence qua Dr. Arbind Kumar, the appellant in Cr. Appeal (DB)No. 74/2015 at this stage. Consequently, prayer declined as not pressed.
(3.) Mr. Tripathy, however, while praying for suspension of sentence qua Nishi Rani Kerketta in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 62/2015, vehemently contends that the evidence of conspiracy as brought forward during the trial by the prosecution through PW 7 Stela Shoren and PW 10 Amrit Soreng, the father of the deceased and happens to be one of the signatories of F.I.R lodged by the appellant herself on 22nd May, 2012, is not at all convincing inasmuch as on certain material aspects, their evidence during trial is different from the one when they were examined by Investigating Officer under section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C), which fact is evident from the evidence of PW 13 Roshan Guria, Dy.S.P, first Investigating Officer of the present case.;