IN RE Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Reference under Section 395(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ( in short -Code-) has been made by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Tinsukia, for a decision of this High Court on the following question of law - Whether the restriction on Assistant Sessions Judge from passing a sentence of imprisonment for a term exceeding 10 years under Section 28(3) of the Code would act as an impediment to conduct trial or would vitiate the trial, so conducted by the Assistant Sessions Judge, in respect to case relating to offence punishable with imprisonment above 10 years ?

(2.) FACTS giving rise to this Reference are these. On 14.10.2013, around 7 p.m., prosecutrix was returning along with one Deven Mura to her house after attending Karam Puja at Jalponia Tea Estate. On way, three accused persons, namely, Bikash Gohain, Manash Jyoti Gohain and Manoranjan Baruah restrained and assaulted them. The accused persons then first committed gang rape on the prosecutrix in the forest and thereafter in the play field. The prosecutrix lodged the First Information Report on 15.10.2013 at Police Station Tinsukia. The Police, after investigation, filed a charge sheet against the accused persons for offences under Section 376D and 366 of the Indian Penal Code. The Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Tinsukia, thereupon completed the necessary formalities and committed the case to the Court of Sessions for trial. The Sessions Judge, in turn, registered the same, as Sessions Case No.242(T) of 2014 and vide order dated 13.11.2014, transferred it to the Assistant Sessions Judge for trial.

(3.) ON 13.11.2014, the Assistant Sessions Judge, Tinsukia framed charges under Section 366 and 376D of the Indian Penal Code against the accused persons, to which, they pleaded not guilty. The accused persons were, therefore, put to trial. During trial, the Assistant Sessions Judge recorded the evidence of 13 witnesses and even examined the accused persons under Section 313 of the Code. At no point of time, objection to competency to try the offences was taken by the accused persons. The accused persons, in fact, finally argued the case so that judgment is passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge.