NEPAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This jail appeal is directed against the judgment dated 25-4-2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, in S.T. No. 57 of 2010 convicting the appellant U/s 302/376(1) IPC and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment with fine and another rigorous imprisonment for 10 years with fine for commission of rape.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the deceased was a widow and lived with her two daughters, Bapi Bhowmick (the eldest) and Priyanka Bhowmick (the youngest) at an abandoned quarter of Bishramganj School after the death of her husband, while her second daughter, Puja Bhowmick was staying at an orphanage at Abhoynagar. To sustain her livelihood, she used to work as a maid servant and a bidi worker. The appellant is also a resident of the same locality. The appellant developed an illicit relationship with the deceased and used to visit her at her house frequently and speak with her over a mobile phone. The daughters of the deceased used to call him as "kaku" (uncle) and came to notice that he developed love affair with their mother. The appellant was using Airtel mobile phone bearing No. 9612536069, while the deceased was using mobile phone No. 9612536197. On 10-8-2009 at about 8-30 PM, the appellant had heated altercation with the deceased over their mobile phones. On 11-8-2009 at about 5-6 PM, the appellant rang up the mobile phone of the deceased, but the deceased left behind her mobile handset at home with Bapi Bhowmick, who responded the call and told him that her mother was not at home, to which the appellant asked her to tell her mother to call him up on her return and also threatened her. At about 9 PM, the appellant is said to have come to the house of the deceased and hot altercation ensued between them; the kerosene lamp in the process fell down and was broken. Both Priyanka Bhowmick and Bapi Bhowmick thereafter fell asleep, but their mother did not sleep. On the following early morning i.e. 12-8-2009, Priyanka Bhowmick woke up and found that her mother was not there whereupon she went to look for her. In the meantime, Smt. Charubala Bhowmick, the mother-in-law of the deceased informed her that the dead body of the deceased was lying in the north-east corner of the school ground. Both of them proceeded to the spot where they found the dead body of the deceased with her sari wrapped around her neck with her mobile handset lying close by.

(3.) On receiving the telephonic information, the police rushed to the place of occurrence and received the FIR from Bapi Bhowmick and took custody of the dead body and registered a regular case, namely, Bishramganj P.S. Case No. 40 of 2009 U/s 302 IPC. In the meantime, the appellant, whose name came up as the possible culprit during investigation, consumed poison in the morning of 12-8-2009 and tried to commit suicide, but he got admitted to Bishalgarh Hospital wherefrom he was referred to G.B. Hospital. While he was in the Hospital, the IO of the case seized his mobile bearing No. 9612536069. After his recovery, the appellant was arrested on 20-8-2009 and identified the spot where he murdered the deceased and confessed before the people who gathered there that he committed the murder and also identified the place where he consumed the poison. In the course of investigation, the IO visited the place of occurrence, prepared the sketch map with index, recorded the statements of available witnesses U/s 161 CrPC, seized the mobile handset, the broken kerosene lamp, the viscera by preparing a seizure memo in the presence of witnesses. The IO also collected P.M. report, medical examination report of the appellant, inquest report and forwarded the viscera and vaginal swab to SFSL and collected the SFSL report. On completion of the investigation, the IO charge-sheeted the appellant U/s 376/302 IPC. The learned Sessions Judge, on commitment, framed the charge U/s 376(1)/302 IPC, to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In course of trial, the prosecution examined 31 witnesses to bring home the charge against the appellant and exhibited some documents but there is no direct evidence to show the involvement of the appellant in the crime; the prosecution is, therefore, based on circumstantial evidence. After the closure of the prosecution witnesses, the appellant was examined U/s 313 CrPC and denied all the allegations made against him and claimed that he is innocent, but no evidence was adduced by him in defense. The learned Sessions Judge thereafter concluded the trial and convicted the appellant in the manner indicated earlier. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, this appeal is now preferred by him.