DIMBA KALITA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal against conviction of the appellants u/s. 302 lead with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentencing them to imprisonment for life.

(2.) The appellants are brothers. The allegation against them is fratricide, that is, murder of their own brother. The prosecution case is that P.W. 4. Naga Kalita had 4 sons: Dimba Kalita, appellant No. 1; Akaman Kalita, P.W. 7; Bhola Kalita, the deceased and the youngest Putul Kalita, appellant No. 2. The brothers fell out and lived separately having separate dwelling houses, only Bhola continued to stay with his parents in his paternal house. Bhola and his mother developed a bitter relationship with the appellants. They had continuous disputes and differences. Although separated Putul Kalita lived quite near his paternal house. Putul was aged about 20/22 years and married recently. The prosecution evidence shows that Putul's wife had to leave her husband's house due to misbehaviour of Bhola. It also appears that there was a round of row between Putul and the deceased Bhola in the morning of the date of occurrence. As alluded to the parties bad strained relationship. However, it is the prosecution case that in the evening Bhola was found inside the house of appellant Putul with a dao, scuffling with the appellants. On hearing an outcry P.W. 6, Smti. Sarumai Kalita, went to the direction of the commotion and found that the appellants and Bhola were fighting amongst themselves. She opened the door and Bhola went out but Dimba, appellant No. 1 hacked him on the neck. Bhola fell down in the courtyard and berthed his last. She said that she could not distinctly see what happened inside the room as there was just a flickering light of a lantern. She informed her other son P.W. 7, Akanman, who came and wanted to see the aftermath of the incident. But nobody in the vicinity came at night. Thereafter, on the following day, P.W. 4, Naga Kalita lodged an information with the police at about 9. 30 A.M. In the ejahar, P.W. 4, Naga stated that appellant Putul's wife had left for her paternal house as Bhola was found outraging her modesty. He stated that on 25-7-80 in the evening his four sons battled in Putals house. He specifically alleged that Bhola caused grievous injuries to his eldest son Dimba Kalita, (appellant No. 1) at Putuls house. Bhola also received injuries and lay dead at their residence. The police investigated the case and in the course of investigation, it is alleged, the appellant Putul made a confessional statement implicating himself as well as co-appellant Dimba. The police submitted a charge-sheet and the appellants were charged u/s. 302 read with Sec. 34 I.P.C. The prosecution examined 8 witnesses to bear up its case.

(3.) On the testimony of P.W. 6, Mustt. Sarumai Kalita, the sole eye witness to the occurrence, coupled with the confessional statement marked Exhibit 6, learned Judge held the accused guilty u/s. 302/34 I.P.C. It may be stated here that the appellants had to be provided with free Jegal aid as they were indigent. In this court as well the appellants have been provided with free legal aid. It may be stated here that the confessional statement of Putul, Ext. 6 was recorded on 1-8-80. Admittedly, he was an indigent person. He was produced before the Magistrate, but he was not provided with any legal aid or lawyers assistance. A lawyer was provided in the court of Sessions, that is, during the trial of the case. The admitted prosecution case is that the incident happened inside the house and compound of Putul. The appellants had injuries on their persons and they went to the police station to inform about the incident and they were sent to hospital for treatment. Appellant Dimba bad to be hospitalised whereas the other appellant, it is stated by the prosecution, was discharged after rendering medical aid.