ARUP BORGOHAIN @ KANTU Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. D.K. Das, learned amicus curiae, and Mr. Z. Kamar, learned Public Prosecutor, Assam, assisted by Ms. S. Jahan, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam. The material facts of the prosecution case disclose that one Rubul Konwar is the deceased. There was monetary transaction between the accused and the deceased and there were differences between them. On 10.04.2007, the deceased and PW2 was going together on a bicycle in the village near Shiv Temple and at about 7 pm, the accused came with a machete, picked up quarrel and assaulted the deceased. As a result, deceased fell down. PW2 shouted for help, the villagers came and the accused fled away after the assault. PW2 also informed PW3 who was passing by immediately after the conclusion of the incident about the accused assaulting the deceased. Records disclose that around 7.25 pm, police was informed by the VDP Secretary about the incident. The same is recorded in Assamese and English translation is as follows:

(2.) Police arrived at the scene. The injured had already succumbed to the injuries at the spot. Inquest is held on the dead body and the dead body is also subjected to post mortem examination. The autopsy report discloses that death is on account of shock and hemorrhage due to the injury to the neck. Injuries were ante mortem in nature and death is homicidal. On the next day, brother of deceased PW4 lodged a written complaint vide Ext. 3 in Assamese. The English translation is as follows:

(3.) The accused is apprehended on 11.04.2007. The investigating officer, on completion of investigation, has filed Final Report and the accused is charged for committing offence under Section 302 IPC.