MANGAL SINGH DEB BARMA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the convict is against the judgment of conviction dated 19. 3. 2002 recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, North Tripura, Kailasahar in Sessions Trial No. 42 (NT/k)/2001 convicting the appellant under Sections 302/34 of the IPC and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, in default, to suffer R/i for 2 years for the offences committed under Section 302 IPC and also to undergo R/i for 3 years for the offences committed under Section 27 of the Arms Act and directing that both the sentences would run concurrently.

(2.) THE prosecution case as revealed from the prosecution story is that on 19. 3. 98 at about 8. 05 PM, on receiving information that some extremists attacked the house of Sudhan Debbarma (deceased) of Demdum, the Officer-in-Charge of Fatikroy P. S. made GD Entry No. 661 and rushed to the house of Sudhan Debbarma, where all about 9. 45 PM a written FIR was lodged by Sri Habiram Debbarma (PW 1) stating inter alia that on that day at about 7. 15 PM, while his father Sudhan Debbarma was sitting with his youger brother and sister inside their house some persons entered their hut by kicking open the door and fired at his father and as a result of which his father died on the spot. In the FIR, it has further been mentioned that the miscreants were about 4/5 in numbers armed with modern weapons, out of which one was Sahadeb Debbarma (who died subsequently) and another was Mangal Singh Debbarma (appellant herein ). On receipt of the said FIR, the police registered Fatikroy P. S. Case No. 18/98 under Sections 457/302/34 IPC read with Section 27 of the Arms Act and started investigation. During investigation, the statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Crpc, few articles were seized and the dead body of Sudhan Debbarma was sent for post mortem examination, the report of which was also submitted by the concerned Doctor. On completion of investigation, the investigating agency submitted charge-sheet under Sections 302/34 IPC read with Section 27 of the Arms Act against both the accused persons, namely Mangal Singh Debbarma (appellant herein) and Sahadeb Debbarma, who died before committal. Since the offences against the appellant were exclusively triable by the Sessions Court, he was committed to the Court of Session under the provisions of Crpc. The learned Sessions Judge, thereafter on 4. 1. 2002, framed charge against the present appellant under Sections 302/34 IPC and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The charge was read over and explained to the appellant, to which he had pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. N. Majumder, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. D. Sarkar, learned PP, Assam.