RAMESWAR HEMBRAM Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18th September, 1989 passed by Sri B.U. Mukherjee, addl. Sessions Judge, 5th Court, Midnapur in the Sessions Case being No. S.T. III of March, 1989 of that Court under which he found the accused appellant guilty under section 302 IPC and convicted him thereunder and sentenced him to suffer under imprisonment of life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- i.d. further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The prosecution case briefly stated was as follows.

(2.) Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order the convict has preferred the present appeal challenging the findings of the trial Court as erroneous, illegal and liable to be set aside.

(3.) The learned trial Judge framed two points for determination. First, whether the accused committed murder by intentionally causing the death of Delho Hembram as alleged and secondly, whether the accused was proved guilty of the offence alleged and, whether he was liable to be convicted. In answering both the points against the accused learned Judge has found that although there was no direct evidence against the accused, no eyewitness deposing that he saw the accused to assault the deceased with an axe, yet there was strong circumstantial evidence in support of prosecution charge. The circumstances which according to the learned trial Judge were found established from the evidence are as follows. (i) Raimoni and other children of the deceased shouted and raised hue and cry; (ii) the people of the neighbourhood ran to the house on hearing such cries; (iii) the children of the accused, particularly Raimoni, disclosed to the persons assembled there at that time that the accused Rameswar had assaulted Delho and had fled away; (iv) Rameswar was found absent in his house at that dead hours of the night; (v) on a search being conducted by the villagers Rameswar was found in the field; (vi) when the villagers saw him and chased him he ran into his house and going into a room he closed the door from inside of that room; (vii) he disclosed from that closed room in loud voice that he had assaulted his wife; (viii) after police came he confessed before them that he had thrown away the weapon of offence in the Karpura tank; (ix) an axe was recovered from the said tank in pursuance of his statement and on his saying; (x) the doctor's opinion that the deceased had sustained injuries from sharp-cutting weapons on her person as a result of which she died and the doctor's evidence that the injuries which he found on the dead body of the deceased could have been inflicted by the axe, which was materially exhibited, when the same was shown to the doctor.