TIKENDRAJIT MOHAN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. K.A. Mazumdar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State respondent. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 10.10.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sivasagar in Sessions Case No. 77(S-S)/2005 convicting the accused appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months more.

(2.) The facts briefly stated are that, an FIR was lodged with the Officer-in-Charge of the Sivasagar police station on 13.12.2001 by one Smti. Juri Duara, Secretary, on behalf of Lakhimi Mahila Samiti and Smti. Bijoya Gogoi, contending inter alia that on 7.12.2001, Friday, at around 10-30 P.M. hearing hue and cry at the house of Tikendrajit Mohan (the accused appellant herein) son of Sri Purnakanta Mohan, resident of Banmukh, Gohaingaon, the neighbors went there in a run and witnessed Smti. Monika Mohan, wife of the accused appellant, burning in front of her husband in an absolutely naked state. Later on, the victim was taken to Joysagar Hospital and after she was administered the first aid she was shifted to Assam Medical College and Hospital, Dibrugarh. In the meanwhile, she died. However, the public suspected that the death was a consequence of husband's torture. Upon receipt of the FIR so lodged, police registered a case being Sivasagar Police Station Case No. 369/2001 under Section 498A IPC and started investigation. After completion of investigation police submitted charge sheet under Section 304(B) IPC. The offence being exclusively triable by the court of sessions, the same was committed to the learned Sessions Judge, Sivasagar by the learned SDJM, Sivasagar. Learned Sessions Judge, Sivasagar on the materials available, framed charge under Section 304B IPC. The charge so framed being read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) The prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses in support of its case. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the learned trial Court recorded the statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Defence also adduced two evidence namely, Jogamaya Mohan (DW 1) and Khanindra Mohan (D.W. 2). Defence plea was of complete denial.