HOPNA HANSDA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Hopna Hansda filed this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction dated 3.12.93 and sentence dated 7.12.93 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Malda in Sessions Trial No. 15 of 1993 arising out of Session Case No. 34 of 1992 in connection with Habibpur P. S. Case No. 31/89 dated 20.5.1989. By the said judgment, the present appellant was found guilty under section 302 of the IPC, convicted thereunder and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default, to undergo RI for six months more.

(2.) The prosecution case is that on 20.5.1989 at about 18.30 hours, Gopinath Barman, Prodhan of Habibpur Gram Panchayet submitted a written complaint to the O. C. of the Habibpur P. S. alleging that one Lakshmi Ram Baskey informed him that while he along with his mother Dhangi Hansda, aged about 35 years, was proceeding towards Kenpukur hat for selling pork, she was attacked by the present appellant Hopna Hansda by means of one Hansua and she was assaulted to death near Jodangi field within Misterpara village. Hearing this, the Prodhan went to the place of occurrence and found Dhangi Hansda lying dead in a pool of blood. So, keeping Baneswar Mondal, a member of the Gram Panchayet to guard the said deadbody, he went to the police station and submitted a written complaint. The said written complaint was treated as FIR and Habibpur P. S. Case No. 31 of 1989 dated 20.5.1989 was started.

(3.) In course of investigation, inquest was held on the deadbody and the deadbody was sent to the Superintendent of the District Hospital, Malda for post-mortem examination. Different articles were seized from the place of occurrence and the accused was arrested and on the basis of his statement one blood-stained Hansua was seized from the residence of the present appellant in presence of the witnesses on the basis of seizure list. Hansua was sent for chemical examination along with other articles. Meanwhile, minor son of the victim was placed before the Magistrate for recording his statement under section 164 of Cr. PC and after recording such statement and after collecting copies of the statement and other materials including the post-mortem report and on completion of the examination of the witnesses, a chagesheet under section 302/34 of the IPC was filed against Hopna Hansda and Marang Hansda. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and on perusal of the materials on record, the learned Sessions Judge on 8.1.93 framed a charge under section 302/34 of the IPC against both the committed accused persons viz. Hopna Hansda and Marang Hansda. Both the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge for which the prosecution produced 14 witnesses including the I. O. However, no defence witness was produced, but the defence case as can be ascertained from the trend of cross-examination and answers given by the accused persons under section 313 of Cr. PC is that they are falsely implicated in this case due to political rivalry.