CHOCHA VARJANG Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgement of conviction dated 03/02/2012 of the learned Sessions Judge, Dhemaji, passed in Sessions Case No. 29 (JN)/2007 (The State of Assam Vs. Chucha Varjung) . By the said judgement, while convicting the accused appellant under Sec. 302 and 307 IPC, he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000.00, in default, further R.I. for one year for the offence under Sec. 302 Penal Code and has also been sentenced to undergo imprisonment of 10 years with fine of Rs. 10,000.00 and in default, R.I. for one year for the offence under Sec. 307 Penal Code. Both the sentences are to run concurrently.

(2.) On the basis of the FIR that was lodged on 06/03/2006 by the PW-1 with the Officer-in-charge, Jonai P.S., Jonai P.S. Case No. 23/20-06 was registered under Sec. 302/326/307/427 Penal Code. As stated in the FIR, in the morning on 06/03/2006 at about 0600 hrs., the accused appellant capturing the weapon in question from one Sunny Salathiya (LMG), started firing indiscriminately and in the process, two persons died and another sustained injury. He was over powered to other CRPF personnel. It was also stated that both the injured and the accused appellant had been sent to the Hospital. Be it stated here that the incident occurred inside a CRPF camp and the accused appellant and so also the two deceased persons and the injured were all CRPF personnel.

(3.) On receipt of the FIR which was preceded by GD entry on receipt of information over phone, the police swung into action and carried out investigation, on conclusion of which, submitted charge sheet against the accused appellant under Sec. 302/307 Penal Code. Charges having been framed under the said sections and the accused appellant having denied of the same, trial started, during which the prosecution examined 11 witnesses including the I.O. and Medical Officer and the Ballistic expert. The injured was examined as CW-1. The accused appellant examined himself as DW-1. He was also examined under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C. The learned Trial Court appreciating the evidence on record having convicted the accused appellant and sentenced as aforesaid, he has preferred this appeal.