SUBHASH KURMI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16.2.94 delivered by Sessions Judge, Cachar, Silchar in Sessions Case No. 109/92, thereby holding the appellant guilty of offences punishable under Section 457/380/302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5,000/- for offences punishable under Section 302 IPC; one year's R.I. for offences punishable under Section 457 IPC and a fine of Rs. 500/- and similar punishment for offences under Section 380 IPC, in lieu of payment of fine the appellant has been sentenced to undergo different terms of imprisonment for a period of r.wo years for non-payment of fine of Rs. 5,000/- and two month's R.I. for non-payment of fine of Rs.500/- as imposed by the trial Court for offences under Sections 302/457 and 380 IPC.

(2.) Prosecution case was - the appellant at the time of occurrence was aged about 19 years as approximated by the Court (while recording his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 16 years as claimed by the appellant) was a tea garden labourer. He was carrying a love affair with the daughter of the deceased. This girl Monika, examined as P.W.-12 was a minor her age at the time of her deposition was about 12 years on Court's assessment, while she claimed to be 15 years. She had studied upto 5th standard. It is the prosecution case that the accused used to tease her, he even proposed to marry her. This proposal was rejected by P.W.-12. He even placed a steel ring and comb underneath the pillow of Monika, once she was dragged by means of a 'Gamocha'. The matter was reported to her father who had chastised him once. When she was dragged she raised alarm, the appellant was beaten up by Monika's father. After this incident she was shifted to Kalinagar where she stayed with her uncle. Once while returning from the tea garden where she was employed, the accused happened to meet her and asked her to return to Dumurghat. The reply given by Monika was - "I pretended that I would not go as I had a quarrel with my father." The accused persisted if she would return to Dumurghat and she emphatically refused it was at that stage that the accused held out a threat saying that he would see her father. The narration of this background of events has become necessary as the case and the appellant's conviction is solely based on circumstantial evidence. Now coming to the fateful night, of night intervening 24th and 25th of June, 1992, around 1-30 P.M. a thief entered the house of informant Mohan Hazam's younger brother Alok, the deceased who raised alarm when he was hit by the thief with a sharp edged weapon, the victim died immediately after the attack. P.W.-8 lodged an 'Ejahar', Ext 2 at Udharband Police Station and the gist of this Ejahar has been quoted above. The scribe of this Ejahar is P.W.-3, Nandadulal Chanda. On the basis of this report a case under Sections 457/380/302 IPC was registered and taken under investigation. P.W.-15 is the I.O., who received the Ejahar at 8- 30 A.M. next day morning, that is,25th. He visited the place of occurrence, held an inquest on the dead body of Alok. Its report is Ext. 1. Seizued a 'Katha' (quit), said to be blood stained as per Exi, 5. Some portion of the broken reeds were also seized as per Ext. 6. The dead body was forwarded to the medical college for post-mortem examination. P.W.-16, performed the autopsy.

(3.) The accused was taken into custody on 27.6.94, around 1-20 P.M. from the factory of Urrunabond T.E. What followed thereafter, can be best described in the words of the I.O. himself, as it has a material bearing on the appreciation of evidence by the trial Court: