Supreme Court Upholds Life Sentence in Witchcraft-Related Murder Case
The Supreme Court of India confirmed the life imprisonment of a man accused of murdering a woman he believed practiced witchcraft. In the case of Balku Oram v. State of Odisha, the bench comprised of Justices Prashant Kumar Mishra and NV Anjaria upheld the decisions of the trial court and the Orissa High Court, affirming the conviction and sentence of the accused, Balku Oram.
Compelling Evidence and Witness Testimony
The court found compelling direct evidence against Oram, establishing his role alongside a co-accused in the brutal killing. “The nature of the direct evidence appearing against the appellant (Balku Oram) is compelling,” the court noted, emphasizing the heinous nature of the crime linked to superstitious beliefs.
Addressing the Menace of Witch-Hunting
Expressing deep concern over the persistence of witch-hunting, the Supreme Court highlighted how superstition continues to overshadow the rule of law. “The malady of witch-hunting still plagues sections of our society, where prejudice, superstition, and irrational fear supersede the rule of law,” the bench stated. It pointed out that victims are often women, subjected to various forms of violence and ostracism.
Case Background and Legal Proceedings
The case originated from the murder of Puni Naik in Rourkela, Odisha, in February 1998. She was accused of causing the death of Manobodha Naik’s youngest daughter through witchcraft. Balku Oram, with co-accused Udai Oram, attacked Puni, resulting in her death. Puni’s daughter, Sukra Naik, aged 15-16 at the time, witnessed the assault. Her testimony, supported by medical evidence, formed the cornerstone of the prosecution’s case, leading to the conviction and life sentences of the accused under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Supreme Court’s Rejection of Appeals
On appeal, Balku contended that the conviction should not rest solely on Sukra’s testimony, being a related witness. He also sought a reduction of his charge from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder. The Supreme Court dismissed these arguments, emphasizing that a conviction can rely on a sole eyewitness if credible. “When there is direct evidence in the form of a sole eyewitness testimony, there exists no legal impediment on convicting solely on the basis of that since what matters is the quality and not the quantity of the witnesses,” the court observed.
More Read
Justice Over Superstition
The bench rejected the notion that Sukra was an interested witness simply due to her relationship with the deceased. It explained that being a relative does not inherently make a witness biased unless personal motives are evident. Further, the court declined to lessen the charge, as the severe injuries inflicted on Puni indicated an intention to kill.
The Supreme Court’s judgment serves as a reminder of the necessity for justice to triumph over superstition and irrational beliefs, reinforcing the importance of constitutional morality.
[Read Judgement]
