MAINUL HUSSAIN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred under Sec. 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order dtd. 14/3/2022 passed by the learned District & Session Judge, Morigaon in Session Case No.148/2015. By the aforesaid judgment, the learned Sessions Judge has sentenced the accused/appellant under Sec. 302 of IPC and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment (RI) for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000.00 in default further simple imprisonment of 3 years and also convict under Sec. 307 R/W 323 of IPC and convict under Sec. 201 of IPC the rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.10,000.00 in default further simple imprisonment of 3 months and convict under Sec. 120 (B) of IPC the rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.10,000.00 in default further simple imprisonment of 3 months and convict under Sec. 379 of IPC the rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and also to pay a fine of Rs.10,000.00 in default further simple imprisonment of 3 months.

(2.) The criminal law was set into motion by lodging of an Ejahar by PW2 on 22/7/2014 wherein, it was alleged that on 20/7/2014, at about 3.30 pm, the accused had hired an Alto 800 vehicle of his friend Abhimanyu Biswas (deceased) from Jagiroad Taxi Stand to go to Nagaon. On the way, the deceased had also picked up the informant from his home and after completion of the work, they had come back to Jagiroad at 9:00 pm. Thereafter, the accused persons had asked to drop them at Boha market. On the way to Boha, the accused persons had picked up two more unknown persons in the vehicle and on reaching Na-Bohotia, the informant saw the accused person no. 2 dealing blows on the head of the deceased with a glass bottle and the informant, out of fear had opened the car door and jumped from the moving vehicle. Thereafter, the accused persons had tried to strangulate him and he had become unconscious. After regaining his senses, the informant had made a phone call to his home from a house nearby situated and informed about the incident whereafter, the family members had rescued him and on the next day i.e. 21/7/2014, at about 9:00 am, the body of the deceased was recovered from Nukora forest. It has also been alleged that the accused persons had fled away taking the vehicle with them. In the aforesaid FIR, 3 (three) nos. of accused persons have been named, including the present appellant as accused no. 3.

(3.) After registration of the FIR, investigation was made including recovery of the body of the deceased and also the vehicle and a mobile phone, allegedly belonging to the deceased. Thereafter, the Charge-sheet was filed. After framing of the charges and denial thereof, the trial had begun in which the prosecution had adduced evidence through 13 (thirteen) nos. of Prosecution Witnesses. There were also 2 (two) nos. of Court Witnesses who were police officers. PW1 is the person from whose house the phone call was made by the informant. The said PW1 had however turned hostile and in his chief examination, he did not support the version of the informant PW2.