BANIZUDDIN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. J. M. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Choudhury for the appellants and Mr. K. C. Mahanta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, for the Respondent State. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 15. 12. 2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta, in Sessions Case No. 54/2003, convicting the accused/appellants under Section 302/34 of the IPC and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) only each and in default etc. , to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 (one) year.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts are as follows : On 18. 04. 2000 at around 8 A. M. both the accused persons and the deceased Lal Mahmud while they were busy demarcating their land, entered into an altercation and the accused Ashatulla started assaulting Lal Mahmud by lathi and while he fell down, accused Banizuddin stabbed Lal Mahmud by sharp weapon at his left chest and abdomen causing his death. The FIR was lodged by Abdul Kashem before the in-charge, Koyakuchi Police Outpost on 18. 04. 2000 and the same was forwarded to the Officer-in-Charge, Barpeta Police Station and a Case being Barpeta Police Station Case No. 258/2000 was registered on the same date under Section 302/34 IPC. Investigation was made and completed by Sri Krishna Kanta Medhi, PW-8, in-charge, Koyakuchi Police Outpost, who submitted the charge sheet against the accused/appellants under Section 302/34 IPC. The Case being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta, committed the same to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta. During investigation the Investigating Officer Sri Krishna Kanta Medhi, visited the place of occurrence and prepared inquest of the deceased (Exhibit 3) in presence of witnesses. He also recovered some articles and prepared a seizure list in presence of the witnesses. The dead body of Lal Mahmud was sent to Barpeta Civil Hospital for post mortem examination and thereafter he recorded the statements of witnesses under Section 161 Cr. P. C. , arrested the accused and sent them to the Court. As many as 8 witnesses including a Doctor, who conducted the post mortem on the deceased, were examined by the prosecution. The accused persons adduced two defence witnesses during the trial. PW-2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 have deposed that they saw the occurrence and they are eye witnesses. All of them have deposed in the similar line corroborating the evidence of each other.

(3.) IT may, however, be pertinent to note that PW-2 who lodged the FIR stated in the said FIR that the accused No. 1 Banizuddin stabbed his brother-in-law (Lal Mahmud) in the belly with a sharp iron weapon and killed him at the spot. On the other hand the said PW-2 Barek Ali @ Abdul Barek in his deposition stated that Banizuddin stabbed Lal Mahmud by dagger at his left chest and right abdomen. The other PW's No. 3 to 7 also deposed that Banizuddin stabbed Lal Mahmud by dagger at his chest and abdomen.