GOUTAM KUIRY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 7.2.2015 and 11.2.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court Purulia in Sessions Trial no 11/11 arising out of Sessions Case no. 22/11 convicting the appellants for commission of offence punishable under Sections 326/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- each in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months more for the offence punishable under Section 326 IPC and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life each for the offence punishable under section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences shall run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellant is to the effect that on 9.4.2010 Ajit Kr. Mahato was sitting on the bank of pond namely, Suri bandh, with his brother Hare Krishna Mahato (PW9). At that time on the instigation of Sakha Kaibarta, Gautam Kuiry fired at Ajit. As a result Ajit suffered bullet injury on his chest in the right side as well as on his left leg. He was initially admitted to Purulia Sadar hospital and thereafter transferred to Bankura Medical College and Hospital. On the written complaint of Asutosh Mahato, elder brother of the victim (PW 1) Kanda PS case no 9/10 dated 12.4.2010 under section 325/326/307/34 IPC and 25/27 of Arms Act was registered for investigation against the appellants. In conclusion of investigation, charge sheet was filed and the case was committed to the court of sessions and transferred to the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court Purulia for trial and disposal. Charges were framed against the appellant under sections 326/307/34 IPC and 25/27/35 of the Arms Act. Appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 14 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. Defence of the appellants was one of innocence and false implication. In conclusion of trial, learned trial judge by the impugned judgement and order dated 7.2.2015 and 11.2.2015 convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforesaid. However, appellants were acquitted of the charges under section 25/27/35 of the Arms Act.

(3.) Learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that prosecution case has not been proved as the fire arms were not recovered. Acquittal under section 25/27 of the Arms Act improbabilises the sub-stratum of the persecution case altogether. He further submits that the material on record do not give rise to the conclusion that the appellants intended to murder the victim. Injury on the victim is simple in nature. Accordingly, appellants are entitled to an order of acquittal.