RAMESH SABBAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Ms. U. Das, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as amicus curiae and Mr.D.Das, learned Additional P.P. Assam appearing for the State respondent. Convicted under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to undergo S.I. for life and pay fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment undergo S.I. for one month vide a judgment dated 10.6.05 rendered by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, No. 1, Tinsukia in Sessions Case No. 7(T) 2009, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 112/1999 this appeal has been filed by the appellant from jail.

(2.) The prosecution story is that on 28.3.99 at about 6 p.m. accused Ramesh Sabbar, a labourer of Longtong Tea Estate, caused grievous hurt to Sri Bishu Karmakar by inflicting axe blow on his head and back with an intention to cause his death. The appellant was apprehended by the members of the VDP and handed over to police. On the same day after the occurrence one Sri Jintu Gogoi lodged a written FIR which was registered as Lekhapani P.S. Case No. 17/99, under Section 325/307, IPC. During investigation the police visited the place of occurrence, examined witnesses, sent the injured for medical treatment, seized the axe used by the appellant in assailing Sri Bishu Karmakar and arrested the appellant and forwarded him to Court. On completion of the investigation, police laid charge sheet against the appellant under Section 307/325, IPC. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions, Tinsukia for trial on 23.12.99. On receipt of the case, the learned Sessions Judge, Tinsukia made over the same to the Court of the learned Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Tinsukia for I a disposal. The learned trial Court framed charge under Section 325/307, IPC and the charge being read over and explained, the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to stand the trial.

(3.) The prosecution examined 7(seven) witnesses in all including the Medical Officer and the Investigating Officer to prove its case. The defence, however, examined none. The defence plea is of total denial and false implication. In his statement under Section 313, CrPc, the appellant denied the allegation and stated that the axe was not recovered from his possession.