SUBODH DEB BARMA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29.4.1993 delivered by Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in Sessions Trial No. ST. 66 (WT/K) 92 thereby convicting the accused-appellant under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life. The accused-appellant was tried along with four others namely, Nilratan Deb Barma (2) Sudhanya Deb Barma (3) Maloy Deb Barma and (4) Subrata Deb Barma for offences punishable under Section 498 A and 302 I.P.C. while the other co-accused have been acquitted by the Trial Court of the charges framed against them, the appellant is convicted and sentenced as noted above. No State appeal has been preferred against acquittal of co-accused.

(2.) This appeal has been pending for almost three years, when it is taken up for hearing, none appears for the Appellant, although as many as quarter to a dozen counsel represent him. Despite having sent a peon calling for learned counsel, Mr. Dutta, he is not available. The accused is behind the bars. It is, in these circumstances, that we are taking up the appeal for hearing considering each and every ground as raised in the Memo of appeal, which even otherwise possibly learned counsel, would not have urged, as it is matter of common knowledge that several grounds are raised but only few pressed into service at the time of arguments.

(3.) Prosecution case stated in brief was that the appellant had prior to his marriage, kidnapped Manimala. They were not traceable for about a month. When ultimately traced, P.W.- 1 Smti. Ruhini, a widow, to avoid social humiliation, gave her daughter Manimala in marriage to the accused- appellant. But there was no conjugal harmony between the two. Not only the appellant but his other relations as well use to humiliate, assault and torture, Manimala. The widowed mother having come to learn about ill-treatment meted out to her daughter went to bringing her, but she was not allowed, on the other hand she was threatened to be killed, as also with her daughter Manimala. It was on 13.6.88, some time in the evening that her son-in-law, the appellant informed P.W.-1 that Manimala was missing. She practically searched for her daughter but in vain. Next day morning she was informed by one Monoranjan Debbarma that Manimala was seen hanging to Dumura tree, on the western side of the accused's house. She had searched the place on the previous night but she was not found there. She contacted one Rabindra Debbarma, while she was returning from his house, she was beaten up by the accused. This strengthened her suspicion that the accused had played foul. She therefore lodged a report (ejahar) Ext. P-1 at P.S. Kalyanpur resulting the registration of a case u/s 498, A, 304B & 306 A I.P.C. It needs to be noted that even prior to the lodging of FIR, Ext-1 by Ruhini P.W.-1, the accused-appellant had also lodged a report at P.S. Kalyanpur stating that his wife Manimala had committed suicide on 13.6.1988. This report resulted in registration of a case of unnatural death under Section 174 Cr.P.C. A investigation proceeded in the case registered u/s 498A/304B/306 I.P.C. it came to light that it was not a case of suicide as reported by the Appellant but it was murder. On completion of investigation the accused-appellant was charged and tried along with others for the above offences, the Trial Court while acquitting other co-accused, found the appellant guilty under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to life imprisonment. Hence this appeal.