SUDHIR CHANDRA DAS AND ANR. Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE two appellants, Sudhir Chandra Das and Satya Ranjan Das, were charged, Under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code before Shri S. M. Ali, Additional Sessions Judge, Tripura, for having murdered Gobindalal Das in the ,early part; oft the night of 25th of April, 1968, in the area ,of village Pekuchhera, They were both found, guilty and each sentenced to life imprisonment. They challenge the correctness of their conviction and the sentence.

(2.) THE murder of Gobindalal Das came to light in somewhat quixotic manner. Some women of Halam tribe of Pekuchhera, including P.W. 4 joytanting and P.W. 5 Naikubjang, happened to go to the market at Panisagar on the 25th of April, 1968, for selling -'their load of fuel wood. They returned from the market after the darkness had descended. On their way back, they heard a person lying deep down on the slope of the road moaning and articulating the words "mother mother" The women got frightened. They believed that either it was a case of an attempted manslaughter or some Carnivorous animal had mauled the man. On reaching the village, this set of women reported the occurrence to Raitenthai P.W. 1, the Sardar of the para of Halams and a member of the Gao Panchayat. Raitenthai collected a few villagers including Sudar -shan, a Bengalee, and then all made for the place of occurrence. The injured man had a large number of cut wounds in the regions of throat and head and he was helplessly tossing on the ground because of the pain. He was almost hovering between life and death. Sudarshan aforementioned identified, the injured as an uncle of the accused Sudhir. On getting that information, Raitenthai, accompanied by Pairenbul, went to the house of Sudhir and reported the occurrence to him. Sudhir and the accused Satya, who was then in the house of Sudhir, accompanied the two visitors to the house to the place where Gobindalal lay injured. The two accused, on reaching the place, confirmed that it was Gobindalal Das. The accused Satya then left the place on the pretext of bringing a dao for cutting branches of the trees in the area to improvise a stretcher for carrying the injured to the house. He never returned either to the place of occurrence or to the house of Sudhir. Raitenthai sent for the Gao Pradhan Debendra Chandra Debnath P.W. 9 through Joyram and Jai -tambul. About an hour after the arrival of Debendra Chandra at the spot, the injured expired. He, therefore, sent Bulbul alias Saradindu Chakraborty P.W. 15 and another person to the police station Dharmanagar for reporting the occurrence, The report was lodged with Manindra Sen Gupta P.W. 22, the Officer -in -charge of the police station, at 2 A. M. on 26th of April. After making an entry in the general diary, Shri Gupta left for the scene of occurrence where he reached at about 4 A, M. He recorded the statement, Ext. P -10(b), of the accused Sudhir respecting the identity of the deceased and other matters. He considered that statement to be the first information report and so started the investigations. The document Ext. P -10(b) was sent by him at 9 A. M. to the police station for registration of the case. He prepared the inquest report, collected some bloodstained earth from the spot, arranged a few snaps of the deceased, and then sent the cadaver to Panisagar for autopsy. He searched frantically for the accused Satya but failed. He then arranged a police dog from Agartala to help him in tracking the culprit. He contacted the Officer -in -Charge of the police station Fatikroy for help in the matter of arresting the accused Satya. On 13 -5 -68, he sent a radiogram, to the Officer -in -charge of the police station Sabroom that the accused Satya was reported to be. somewhere within his jurisdiction and so he should take steps to arrest him. Satya was actually arrested on the morning of 14 -5 -68 by Jogesh Chandra Das P.W. 14 from the village Magurchhera.

(3.) THE accused Sudhir is said to have disclosed to Shri Gupta on 3 -6 -1968 that he had kept one dao and an umbrella, used by him in committing the offence, in his house and so could produce the same. The accused Sudhir was then taken to his house and from within the southern hut of his house he produced the dao M. O. 1 and the umbrella M. O. 2. None of the two articles was found stained with blood.