ASSAINAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal is directed against the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by Shri N. K. Panja, the then learned Sessions Judge, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Port Blair is Sessions Case No. 9 of 1993 arising out of Danduspoint Police Station Case No. 130/92 dated 25.8.1992 under Sections 307/324/326 and 452 I.P.C. The convict-appellant is the husband of the Victim Jameela and the father of Victim Abdul Salam, Shajida, Sanida, sons and daughters of the Victim. Victim Khadija is the mother-in-law and Victim Ashraf is the brother-in-law of the convict All the Victims used to stay at Nsmuaaghar and the convict Assainar used to stay in his father's house at Premnagar, since the incidents of assault twice to the Victim Jameela in the past. The Victim Jameela approached the Administration for her protection apprehending severe assault from the husband long before the present incident and ultimately, the Lt. Governor ordered the convict appellant not to enter into the area at Namunaghar. But on 24,8,1992 at about 21-45 hours the convict armed with dreadly weapons like 'Ballam Deb' came from Premnagar, raided the house of Jameela. He first assaulted Ashraf on the abdomen so severely that bowels came out. Ashraf was taking his meal at that time, and out of fear of life holding the Injury with hands ran away through the front door. The convict then assaulted his wife Jameela on several times by the major parte of the body. Alarm raised by Jameela attracted her mother Khadija and his so and two daughters who rushed to the kitchen and found the convict to assault Jameela Jameela's mother tried to rescue Jameela but she was also assaulted. In the similar way both the daughters and son received injuries due to assault by the Victim. Jameela was dragged out from the house and other women went behind hiding out of fear. the convict-appellant once more entered into the house and after a while be left the house and weal towards the junction of public road. In the meantime the unconscious body of Jameela was found nearby a ditch on the road with multiple injuries and she was recovered therefrom. One of the neighbours PW-7 being attracted by the hue and cry came to the place of occurrence and was reported about the incident and be Informed the police FIR was drawn up accordingly on the basis of such information and the police took up investigation. In course of investigation police forwarded all the injured persons to the hospital for their treatment. On the prayer of the police dying declaration of Jameela and Ashraf was recorded by an Executive Magistrate. The weapon of assault was seized along with blood stained lungi, shirt etc. of the accused and forwarded to the Forensic Expert and Serologist. Ultimately Ashraf and Jameela survived. Police then collected the injury reports from the Hospital also the report of the Forensic Expert and Serologist. The eye witnesses were all examined along with other witnesses and on completion of the investigation the police submitted charge-sheet under Sections 307/324/326/452 I.P.C.

(2.) During Trial the learned Sessions Judge framed charges under 'Sections 452/324 and 307 I.P.C. against the appellant, to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and trial was started.' The learned Trial Court during trial examined the witnesses and took into consideration the other materials collected by the police during investigation and also the expert's report and finally found the convict appellant guilty to all the charges and convicted him for the same and passed sentence of 5 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 10,000.00 and in default to suffer further R.I. for one year more for the offence under Sec. 452 I.P.C. and also passed sentence of imprisonment for life for the offence under Sec. 307 I.P.C and also a separate sentence of R.I. for two years for the offence under Sec. 324 of the I.P.C., but directed that all Che sentences would run concurrently.

(3.) On being aggrieved by this judgment of conviction and sentence the present appeal is preferred by the appellant on the ground that the Trial Judge has filed to appreciate the discrepancies in the evidence on the side of the prosecution and the order of conviction is not justified by the evidence on record. It is further submitted that the convict is innocent and that injured persons tried to assault him with dreadly weapon and there was a tustle and in course of that tustle the injured persons received the Injuries.