DIPAK TIRKY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal, by the convict, is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 23.07.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur at Tezpur, in Sessions Case No.192/2004, convicting the appellant under Section 302 and 324 IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/ -, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for another 6(six) months and also to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2(two) years, respectively. It has further been directed that the sentences will run concurrently.

(2.) A criminal investigation was set in motion based on the G.D. entry made on 04.12.2002 (Ext. -7) and also the subsequent FIR (Ext. -1) lodged on 05.12.2002, by Khilandar Barla (PW -1), alleging that on 04.12.2002 at about 7.30 P.M. the appellant and his brother Rajen Tirky had assaulted the first informant 's wife and his son Ronald Binod Barla (PW -2) resulting in cut injuries, by means of a sharp edge weapon in the house of Jakarias Kandulna (PW -4) and though the wife was admitted to hospital, she, however, succumbed to the injuries on 05.12.2002. Based on the said first information report, Tezpur Police Station Case No.846/2002 under Section 326/302/34 IPC was registered against both Rajen and Dipak (appellant herein). The police during investigation sent the dead body of the deceased Mary Barla for post mortem examination, recorded the statement of the persons acquainted with the facts of the case under Section 161 Cr.P.C., seized a bicycle as well as one khukri (sharp edge weapon) and upon completion of the investigation submitted the charge -sheet against both Rajen and Dipak under Section 302/34 and 324/34 IPC. The case being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, both the accused were committed for trial to the Court of Sessions and accordingly Sessions Case No.192/2004 was registered. The charges under Section 302/34 and 324/34 IPC were framed on 29.01.2005, which when read over and explained to the accused persons, they denied the same and claimed to be tried. Hence the trial commenced.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. B.M. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. K.A. Mazumdar, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing for the respondent.