PHOKAN SONOWAL Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the convicts from jail is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 1-11-2001 recorded by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-2, Tinsukia in Sessions Case No. 175 (CH)/ 2000 convicting the appellants under S. 302/34, I. P. C. and sentencing them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of rs. 5,000/- each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months each.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is that on 20-2-2000 around 2. 00 p. m. , the Officer -in-Charge of Dholla Police Station, Sri rukumuddin Hazarika (PW 14) along with his police party went to Dhola AJokhowa gaon in connection with operation against a banned organization, namely ULFA. During the course of operation, they were informed about a dead body, which was lying in the field. Thereafter, they went to the place where such dead body was lying and found the same to be of Kuntil Sonowal. On the same day, an FIR was also lodged by the wife of Kuntil Sonowal, namely Smt. Khiroda sonowal (appellant No. 2), alleging that on 19-2-2000 around 11. 00 p. m. , somebody called her husband and when she opened the door, a person entered into their house and dragged her husband out of the house and that though there were other persons present outside, she went to the place of sukur, a co-villager, with her son and after about an hour when she came back with other members of her family, she saw the dead body of her husband lying naked in the nearby field bearing cut injuries inflicted by means of a sharp weapon. On the basis of this FIR, the police registered a case, being dholla P. S. Case No. 9/2000 under S. 302/34, I. P. C. and the investigation was set in motion. On completion of the Investigation, charge sheet was filed against the present appellants and another, namely palas Sonowal under S. 302/34,i. P. C. The case being a Session Triable case, they were committed to the learned Sessions Judge, tlnsukia who on 13-2-2001, framed charge against all the three accused persons under s. 302/34,i. P. C. The charge was read over and explained to them to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and hence, trial commenced.

(3.) DURING the course of trial, the prosecution in order to prove the charges against the accused persons, examined 15 witnesses which includes the investigating officer as well as the doctor who conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased. The defence declined to adduce any evidence. The statements of the accused persons were recorded under S. 313, Cr. P. C. Thereafter, the learned Sessions Judge, on the basis of the evidence available on record, by the impugned judgment convicted the appellants on the basis of the circumstantial evidence as there was no witness to the occurrence, however, acquitted palas Sonowal form the charges levelled against him.