UTTAM CHAKRABORTY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal Nos. 871 and 869 of 2006.

(2.) The facts are as under:

(3.) On the completion of the investigation the Appellants were brought to trial on a charge of murder. The prosecution relied primarily on the evidence of PW-6 Marjon Suklabaidhya, who was projected as an eye witness to what had happened on the fateful day, PW-1 Panchami Suklabaidya aforesaid, PW-2 the Executive Magistrate Manash Das, who held an inquest on the dead body and had noticed a huge cut injury on the person of the deceased, Radhu Paul PW-4 who stated that he had seen both the accused involved in an animated discussion in front of his shop and when he had gone close to them they had changed the topic and had started discussing some business matter and that after a short while a girl had come out and raised a hue and cry and told Mission Suklabaidhya that his wife had died of burn injuries, Nioti Rani PW-6, the mother of the deceased, who deposed to the illicit relationship of her son-in-law and PW-1, and PW-7 the doctor, Khairuz Zaman Choudhary, who had carried out the post-mortem examination and had found very severe cut injuries on the stomach which indicated that the foetus had been removed.