ANDAI BASUMATARY Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. B.B. Narzary, learned counsel assisted Mr. S. Chauhan for the appellants in Crl. A. No. 117/2016, Mr. R. M. Choudhury, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant in Crl. A.(J) No. 68/2015 & Mr. A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant in Crl. A. No. 178/2016. Also heard Mr. M. Phukan, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent No. 1, Mr. M. Kalita, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2/informant in Crl. A.(J) No. 68/2015 and Ms. Meghali Barman, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No. 2/informant in both Crl. Appeal Nos. Nos. 117/2016 and 178/2016.

(2.) All these three appeals arose out of the judgment and order dated 16.05.2015 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chirang, in Sessions Case No. 128(D)/2015. By the said judgment, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellants under Sections 302/201 IPC and sentenced them to imprisonment for life under Section 302 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 201 IPC. The appellants/accused were also sentenced to fine of Rs. 3,000/- each & Rs.1,000/- each u/s 302 and 201 IPC respectively with default stipulation.

(3.) As per the prosecution case, on 06.11.2011, eight accused persons named in the FIR forcibly took away the mother and father of the informant, namely, Smt. Bulao Narzary and Raman Narzary respectively. Later on, they were killed by the said accused persons and buried the bodies in the cremation ground. An FIR was lodged by PW-1, Amar Narzary, on the basis of which, police registered Dhaligaon P.S. Case No. 141/2011 under Sections 143/302/201 IPC and commenced investigation. In course of investigation, the police recovered the bodies of the victims, prepared the inquest report, conducted postmortem examination, recorded the statement of the witnesses and on completion of investigation, laid charge sheet against the eight accused persons, including the present appellants. Out of the eight accused persons named in the charge sheet, one Gauri Boro was declared absconder, as his attendance could not be procured and eventually the present appellants stood trial.