ARINDAM LODH,J. - (1.)This appeal under Section 374 CrPC has been filed by Bhulu Munda, here-in-after called the convict-appellant, against the judgment and order of conviction, dated 31.03.2012 passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Khowai, the then West Tripura District, in ST30(WT/K) 2010, convicting the appellant and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and fine of Rs.2,000/- i.d. to suffer R.I. for 5 months for the offence under Section 451 IPC, and further sentencing him for each of the 3 offences under Section 364 IPC to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, i.d. to suffer R.I. for two years and also sentencing him for each of the 3 offences under Section 302 IPC to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- i.d. to suffer R.I. for two years, with a direction that all the sentences shall run concurrently.
(2.)The appellant has preferred the present appeal on the ground that the Ld. Trial court failed to appreciate the evidence of the witnesses and also misinterpreted the ingredients of the relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code. Ld. Defence counsel strongly argued that there is no evidence that the alleged victim died and that the convict-appellant killed the victim. Ld. Counsel has laid much emphasis that there was a delay of one year in lodging the FIR, but, the Ld. Trial Court did not appreciate this fact and consequently, arrived at an erroneous finding.
(3.)Per contra, Mr. S. Ghosh, learned Special P.P. strongly argued that the FIR itself contains explanation that due to the threat of the convict-appellant and other miscreants, the family of the victim hesitated to lodge any case and ultimately, when the family lost all hopes, filed the case. Learned Special P.P. further argued that the identity of the convict-appellant has been proved by a number of eyewitnesses and for that no doubt can be cast in the truthfulness of the prosecution case.
;