AMITABHA CHAKMA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal, filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is direc-ted against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 02.08.2004, passed by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur, in connection with S.T. 43(ST/S)/2004, sentencing the appellant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for commission of offence under Section 364 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The prosecution case as transpired from the records is that on 28.05.2003, Ajeet Kumar, Executive Engineer, lodged Ejahar at Shilachari Out Post, stating that his driver Pradip Debnath, S/O Jugal Debnath had been missing from Shilachari since 27.05.2003. In the Ejahar, he stated that he personally searched him along with the BSF personnel at different places but could not find out. He further stated in the Ejahar that villagers of Kongjori Mog Para had stated that the said driver had been kidnapped by the unknown miscreants at about 08.30 pm on 27.05.2003 from the said place. On the basis of that Ejahar, the Sabroom P.S. registered a case being Sabroom P.S. Case No.14/2003 under Section 364 IPC on 28.05.2003. On completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was filed against the appellant and the other accused persons, namely, Barna Kanta Tripura, Dil Mohan Tripura and Adhu Mog under Section 364 IPC. The offence, being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions, and thereafter, the charge was framed against the appellant Amitabha Chakma, Barna Kanta Tripura and Dil Mohan Tripura under Section 364 IPC by the Assistant Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur, where the case was transferred by the learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur for trial. The appellant and the other accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge as read over to them and claimed to be tried.

(3.) It appears from the record that prosecution adduced as many as 7 witnesses and brought into evidence certain documents, which were marked as Exbts.1 to 10 series. But the defence did not adduce any evidence whatsoever. The learned trial Court examined the appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. On appreciating the evidence as led by the prosecution, the finding of the conviction was returned by the learned trial Court under Section 364 IPC and the appellant was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. It was however directed that the period of his detention would be set off from the period of his sentence.