AYUB ALI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This jail appeal by accused-appellant Md. Ayub Ali is directed against the judgment and order passed on 14.7.97/19.7.97 in Sessions Case No. 17/96 (C.R.Case No. 137/94) by Shri M.Goswami learned Sessions Judge, Dhubri, whereby the accused-appellant was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 800/-, in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for two months.

(2.) The deceased Md.Mafial Haque Biswas was owner of a plot of land situated at village Srirampur, by the side of the said land there was a plot of land beIcoging to the uncle of the deceased. There was a boundary dispute and on the fateful day, that is, on 20.6.94, at about 7-00 A.M while the deceased along with Chand Mia, P. W.6 was working in the field, the accused Ayub Ali, Jamser Ali and other 8/9 persons came there and there was discus- siion regarding settlement of boundary, which as usual turned to altercation. According to the prosecution, in the midst of the said altercation the accused-appellant Ayub Ali took out a dagger which was kept hidden in umbrella and stabbed the deceased in his abdomen. Casing the in jury the accused fled away along with the weapon of assault.The injured Mafial Haque Biswas was taken to the hospital where the Doctor declared him brought dead.

(3.) On FTR being lodged, police registered a case under Sections 147/148/149/ 447/302/325/ IPC and after usual investi- gation submitted charge-sheets against, as many as , 13 persons. One of the accused Abdul Rahman Sarkar died During the pendency of the trial. The case was committed before the Court of Sessions and the learned Sessions Judge, Dhubri framed charges against all the accused persons under Sections 149/302 IPC and an alternative charge of Section 302 IPC against all the accused persons. During trial prosecution examined, as many as, 10 witnesses and after trial the learned Sessions Judge acquitted 11 accused persons and convicted and sentenced only the accused appellant as above. Hence the present jail appeal.