LOKESHWAR DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat, convicting him under section 302/34 Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life. He has further been directed to pay a fine of Rs.200.00, in default of which he is to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 (three) months more. The prosecution story, as has been unfolded in the First Information Report lodged by Smti Pratima Bala, wife of the deceased is that her husband Amulya Das, while coming back from the house of his elder brother was attacked with sharp weapons by opposite party. The First Information Report, Ext 2 dated 22.7.87 reads as under ;

(2.) At very outset, it deserves to be noticed that the other two accused absconded during trial compelling the trial Court to proceed against the appellant alone who has been convicted and found guilty under section 302 with the aid of section 34 of the IPC.

(3.) The prosecution, during trial has produced PW 1 Mitharam Das, the real brother of the deceased. He has stated that about 3 years back, at about 7/8 PM on a Wednesday night, Amulya Das (deceased) went to his house at about 6 PM and invited him to see his new house. The witness went with Amulya to see his newly constructed house and after seeing it, they came together. The witness further stated that on a point about 30/40 feet away they separated to go to their respective houses when he heard the cry of Amulya. He lighted the torch and rushed towards the place and found appellant/accused Lokeswar catching hold of Amulya when absconding accused Sushil gave a dao blow on his head from behind. The witness further stated that he raised the alarm when the Muslim accused gave a blow on his leg with an iron rod. This witness, PW 1 went on to state that on receipt of the blow, Amulya (deceased) gagged Lokeswar. On the raising of the alarm, Chandrakanta, son of the witness reached the place of occurrence and he fell down on receipt of the blow. Barring Lokeswar (appellant) the other two accuseds fled away. Lokeswar (appellant) remained gagging with Amulya as he died instantaneously. The witness remained in hospital for 3 months as his bones of right leg were broken. The accused were identified by the witness, his son Chandrakanta. In cross examination, the witness denied that Lokeswar (appellant) 5 was not gagging Amulya (deceased). It was admitted by PW 1 that they had good relations with the family of Lokeswar (appellant) before the occurrence. The witness pleaded ignorance regarding Sushil having a quarrel at the house of Amulya (deceased) four days before the occurrence regarding his daughter. PW 2 is Chandrakanta Das, the son of PW 1. He has supported the version given by his father. In cross-examination, he has denied that the appellant had any injury on his person. He has further stated in cross-examination that he was the first person to reach the place of occurrence after hearing the alarm. He was constrained to admit that Sushil, the other accused had no enmity with Amulya (deceased). He has pleaded lack of knowledge whether deceased had any enmity with Lokeswar (appellant). Dulal, PW 3 is the other nephew of the deceased. He has also supported the prosecution version. PW 4 is the wife of the deceased. However, she being not an eye witness, her statement does not improve prosecution case.