CHADEQUL ISLAM Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is convicts' appeal against the judgment dated 25.6.2007 delivered by the learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta in Sessions Case No. 41/2000 corresponding to GR Case No. 1078 of 1996, convicting under sections 364 /34 IPC and sentencing them to suffer R.I. for 7 (seven) years with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each, in default, to suffer further R.I. for 2 (two) months and under Sections 302 /34 IPC to suffer R.I. for life with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default, to suffer further R.I. for 5 (five) months. The prosecution case, in a nutshell, is that on 20.9.1996, one Samsul Haque lodged an Ejahar with the Officer-In-charge, Howly police station, stating inter alia that his elder brother Nurul Islam (since deceased), was the Headmaster of a local High School and was also a quack (kabiraj). On 19.6.1996 at about 8 P.M., one Chadequl Islam (appellant No. 1) called away the deceased Nurul Islam for treatment of a patient and he returned with injuries and blood stain at about 11 P.M. asking one Karim (PW 2) to save him and he fell down on Karim's courtyard. Hearing the noise, the neighbours rushed to the place where Nurul was lying. On being enquired by the persons, he disclosed the names of the appellants. The injured Nurul was taken in a pushcart to a local hospital situated at about 4/5 kms. but the doctor declared him dead at the hospital. The In-charge of Howly police outpost, on receipt of the Ejahar, made G.D. entry No. 403 dated 29.9.1996 at about 11 A.M. and forwarded the Ejahar to O.C., Barpeta P.S. for registering a case and accordingly Barpeta P.S. Case under Sections 147 /148 /364 /326 IPC was registered against all the appellants. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the appellants under Sections 147 /148 /364 /302 IPC. The concerned Magistrate, on consideration of the materials found, committed the case to the court of Sessions, Barpeta, who framed the charge against all the appellants under Sections /302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. The said charges being read over and explained to them, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(2.) During trial the prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses while the defence examined three witnesses. The appellants were examined under Section 313 CrPC and on conclusion of trial the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused appellants of all the charges by his judgment and order dated 28.5.2003. The said order of acquittal was challenged by the informant (PW 1) Samsul Haque by filing Crl. Revision Petn. No. 541 of 2003 and this court, disposing the said revision petition vide order dated 9.6.2006, set aside the order of acquittal and remanded the matter to the trial court for taking a decision afresh after hearing both the parties. Thus, the learned Sessions Judge, heard the matter afresh and passed the order of conviction and sentence against the appellants which is now under challenge in this appeal.

(3.) We have heard Mr. HRA Choudhury, learned Sr. counsel for the appellants and Mr. K.A. Mazumdar, learned Addl. P.P., Assam for the respondent State.