STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH Vs. TAMA HASI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Reference arises out of the judgment said order dated 18.2.2003 passed in Case No. GR111/99 by the Deputy Commissioner-cum-ex officio Sessions Judge; Papum Pare District; Yupia, Arunachal Pradesh convicting the accused under Sections 452/326/307/34, IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of 10 years and further imposing a fine of Rs. 5,000 under Sections 307/34 IPC and in default of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The accused were further convicted to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000, in default, further R.I. for one month under Section 452, IPC directing to run both the sentences concurrently. Reference under Regulation 30 of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulations, 1945, having been made by the learned Deputy Commissioner, Papum Pare District, Yupia for confirmation of the conviction and sentence imposed upon the accused persons, this reference has been registered.

(2.) On the basis of an FIR lodged with the Officer-in-Charge, Itanagar Police Station by Swami Apramayananda, Monk of R. K. Mission Hospital, Ganga, Itanagar dated 2.8.99 alleging that on that day about 1945 hrs., two local boys came in the house of Dr. K. Zaman, ENT Specialist, R. K Mission Hospital; Ganga and severely assaulted him by inflicting sharp cut injuries on his both hands and fled away from the spot under the cover of darkness. On receipt of the FIR, police registered a Case being Itanagar Police Station Case No. 94/99 under Sections 452/326/307/34, IPC. The Investigating Officer conducted the necessary investigation and during the course of investigation, statement of witnesses were recorded, materials were seized and after closure of the investigation, having found a prima facie case against the accused persons, submitted the charge-sheet against them vide charge-sheet No. 112 of 1999 before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class. The learned Judicial Magistrate, on the basis of materials produced by the I. O. having found the case to be a sessions triable one, committed to the court of the learned Deputy Commissioner for trial vide order dated 29.3.2000. The learned Deputy Commissioner-cum-ex, officio Sessions Judge framed charges jointly against the accused persons under Sections 326/307/452/34, IPC. That apart, the accused Bamang Sangkio was charged under Section 109, IPC. The charges having been explained to all the accused persons, they denied the same and claimed to be tried.

(3.) During the course of trial, the prosecution examined as many as 8 (eight) witnesses including the I.O. At the closure of the prosecution witnesses, the accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. putting the circumstances that appeared against them during the course of trial to which they denied. However, the accused did not produce any defence witness on their behalf.