RAJESH DEBBARMA Vs. THE STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE instant appeal is preferred by the convict appellant challenging the judgment and order dated 02.09.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Khowai in S.T.40 (WT/K) of 2002 where under the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellant under Section 364(A) of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for life and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1 lakh in default to suffer further R.I. for 10 years.

(2.) HEARD Mr. S. Sarkar, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. R.C. Debnath, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State respondent.

(3.) MR . Sarkar, learned counsel appearing for the convict appellant submits that even if the evidence of all the witnesses are believed then also no case is made out against the convict appellant under Section 364(A) of the IPC at best a case is made out under Section 365 of the IPC. He has taken us to the evidence of PW -2 and PW -3, namely Smt. Nisha Saha and Smt. Mithu Debnath, who are the wives of PW -8 (Jahar Saha) and PW -9 (Dilip Das), the persons who were abducted and those witnesses did not state anything regarding the ransom as well as against the convict appellant. He further submits that the learned trial Court convicted the present convict appellant only relying upon the evidence of PW -9 (Dilip Das) who in his evidence stated that he came to learn from his family members that they have collected money and paid the same to the extremists for their release and accordingly they were released by the extremists. But none of the family members were examined except PW -3 (Smt. Mithu Debnath) who did not say anything about the collection of money and paying the same to the extremists. Thus, there is no evidence regarding ransom.