SUBHAJOY TRIPURA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A young man of 22 years was done to death in the night of 9. 10. 99. During investigation, two cousin brothers of the deceased and a friend were nabbed because they had taken the deceased out of his house in the evening of that day with whom he was last seen. In the trial, all the 3 persons who are appellants herein have been found guilty and convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, 'ipc' ). They have been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 5,000/ each, in default, to suffer imprisonment for one year more. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence so imposed on them by the judgment rendered on 30. 5. 01 in Sessions Trial No. 33 (ST/s) of 2000 by the Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Udaipur, the present appeal has been preferred calling in question correctness of the findings therein.

(2.) A brief narration of the material facts may be necessary before we consider the contentions raised. The deceased Hari Charan Tripura, aged 22 years, was the cousin brother of Bikramjoy Tripura and Rambarna Tripura, the two appellants herein. Jogendra Tripura (PW 1), the father of the deceased and Girindra Tripura, the father of the above two appellants are brothers, but were locked in a land dispute generating acrimony between the members of the two families. Subhajoy Tripura, the other appellant herein is a common friend. On 9. 10. 99 at about 7-30 pm, the three appellants herein visited the house of Hari Charan Tripura and took him outside his house situated at a place known as Naibadyapara. The parents of Hari Charan, PWs 1 and 2, were in the house and they asked the three appellants where they were taking Hari Charan. They replied that they would together take a stroll in the village and Hari Charan would spend the night with them. No person other than the parents were present at that time, the other son of the old couple, Madhu Charan Tripura (PW 5), being in a separate house at a stone's throw distance. Though the two families had been simmering with acrimony and enimity, the parents of the deceased had no reason to fear that their son would be harmed by the appellants one of whom, Subhajoy, having apparently nothing to indicate any strained relationship against the deceased. Hari Charan did not return that night and naturally his parents did not consider it necessary to enquire about him during the night as they were told that he would spend the night with the appellants herein. On the following morning at about 7 am, the parents of the deceased were informed by some plantation workers that the dead body of their son was lying on the road side at Garifa new rubber plantation. Jogendra Tripura (PW 1), the unfortunate father, shocked as he was, rushed to the place and saw the dead body with cut injury on the throat and stab injury on the abdomen with a knife penetrated. A good number of persons including the witnesses examined by the prosecution were there one of whom had written the First Information Report (FIR) at the dictation of PW 1. In the FIR, the father of the deceased (PW 1) clearly stated that his deceased son was taken away by the three appellants herein on the previous evening and that he did not return home that night. He suspected that the appellants had killed his son.

(3.) THE FIR was registered by the Manubazar Police station and investigation was at once initiated. The dead body was post mortemed during investigation and the accused persons were finally nabbed. The cause of the death was found to be cut injury on the throat and the abdomen. The dagger which has found planted in the abdomen of the deceased, being the weapon of offence, was seized. The investigation was concluded with the chargesheet against the three appellants following which a full dressed trial was held. As has been noticed above, all the three appellants, on conclusion of trial have been convicted and sentenced. By filling the present appeal, the appellants are before us.