LAWS(GAU)-1971-6-7

KAYUMUDDIN MIA Vs. ABDUL GAFUR AND ORS.

Decided On June 08, 1971
Kayumuddin Mia Appellant
V/S
Abdul Gafur And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition is directed against an order of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge, L. A. D. at Gauhati. The accused -opposite parties were charged Under Section 302/34 and 323 I. P. C. The prosecution story in brief was that on 25 -10 -1966 Abdul Jabbar after taking his tea in the morning went out of his house when he was assaulted by the accused -opposite parties. His son Kayumuddin Mia on hearing alarm went there and saw his father being assaulted by the accused persons from a distance of about 10/15 yards. He immediately rushed to the place of occurrence when he was also assaulted by the accused persons. Abdul Jabbar fell down and became unconscious. Hearing hulla Kamla Khatun wife of Kayumuddin and Nasiban Nessa wife of Abdul Jabbar came to the place of occurrence. The two injured persons were removed to their house where Abdul Jabbar succumbed to his injuries. Kayumuddin was then removed to the hospital for treatment. Ejahar was lodged at Barpeta Police Station. After investigation police submitted charge -sheet Under Section 302/34 Indian Penal Code. The learned committing Magistrate charged the accused persons Under Section 302/34, Indian Penal Code. In the Sessions Court the accused persons were charged as stated above. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges. The prosecution examined 10 witnesses and the defence did not adduce any evidence. The defence case was that the accused were standing outside the compound of the deceased who on seeing them chased them and while chasing he slipped over the ground and sustained the injuries and as a result of which he died. Kavumuddin also chased the accused persons when they were standing outside and in course of a melee Kayumuddin sustained the injuries.

(2.) THE learned Sessions Judge considered the evidence on record and acquitted the accused persons holding that the prosecution failed to prove the charges against the accused persons beyond reasonable doubt,

(3.) WE have gone through the evidence of P. W. 3 Kamla Khatun, There is nothing in her evidence to show that she admitted that she had not seen the actual assault. This finding of the learned Sessions Judge therefore appears to be not borne out by the evidence on record.