REJIA KHATOON Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prosecution case in brief is that on the night of 19.2.2010 at about 8 PM, while Abu Hanifa was sleeping in his house, the appellant Rezia Khatoon suddenly dealt a blow by an axe on his head, causing grievous injuries resulting into his death at Civil Hospital, North Lakhimpur on the same night. On receipt of a written ejahar from Md. Sirajul Islam, PW 1, a case being North Lakhimpur Police Station Case No. 102/10 was registered under Section 302 IPC. Usual investigation was made and on completion of investigation, the I.O. submitted charge-sheet against the appellant under Section 302 IPC. The Magistrate concerned committed the case to the learned Sessions Judge, North Lakhimpur for trial. The learned trial court framed charge under Section 302 IPC, which was read over and explained to the appellant, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in order to establish the charge examined 10 witnesses in all including the I.O. and the medical officer. The appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., who denied the evidence on record but declined to examine any witnesses in her defence. Defence, therefore, took the plea of total denial of the charge without adducing any evidence. The learned trial court convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated above vide judgment & order dated 06.3.2012 passed in Sessions Case No. 88 (NL) 2011, which is under challenge in this appeal.

(2.) The informant Md. Shirajul Islam was examined as PW-1. He deposed that he was informed over phone by one Dulal Mandal that his sister-in-law, appellant, killed her husband who is his elder brother. He could not come as it was already night and the place of occurrence was at a distance of 15/16 kms from his house. So he came in the next morning and saw the appellant being tied and detained by villagers. He also visited the North Lakhimpur Civil Hospital where he found his brother lying dead. Then he lodged an FIR with the North Lakhimpur Police Station. Police held the inquest in his presence. In cross examination he stated that his accused sister-in-law has been suffering from mental illness for long and his deceased brother got her treated but at the time of occurrence the appellant was not suffering from mental illness.

(3.) Pw-2 is one Sri Dulal Mandal. He deposed that on the date of occurrence the children of Abu Hanifa made hue and cry that his father had been killed. Hearing the hue and cry he came in a rush and on his arrival, the children of the deceased told him that their mother killed their father by an axe. The people present at the place of occurrence called for 108 vehicle and shifted Abu Hanifa to Hospital. The police seized the axe vide Ext. 3 and he put his signature as seizure witness. In cross-examination he stated that he knew the accused since before but he does not know that she was suffering from any mental problem. He never saw any quarrel between the appellant and the deceased. The seized axe was not seen in the court. He denied the suggestion that he knew that the appellant was suffering from mental illness.