JULIUS EKKA Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. K. Ete, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, and Mr. N. Lowang, learned Public Prosecutor for the respondents.

(2.) ONE Balensious Ekka is the accused person in Mahadevpur P. S. Case No. 16/94 under Section 302 of I. P. C. . Charges being framed against him and tried, he was convicted under Section 304 Part-I of I. P. C. and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for 7 years with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand only) and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo further terms of 2 months Rigorous Imprisonment, vide judgment and order dated 19. 04. 2006 passed by the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, FTC, E/zone, Namsai, in Sessions Case No. 02/94. The present appeal is preferred against the aforesaid judgment and order, not by him, but by his father Sri Julius Ekka. This is rather unusual but for the ends of justice, the appeal was admitted and thus, we are hearing the matter.

(3.) THE prosecution story is unfurled from the FIR lodged by one Sri Ramesh Pathar, who informed the Officer-in-Charge, Mahadevpur Police Station that one Sri Balensious Ekka murdered Sushil Ekka in his residence on 14. 06. 1994 at around 6 a. m. early morning and after the murder, the accused fled away and the dead body was lying at the spot. On receipt of the written FIR, a crime was registered against the accused person as stated earlier. The first Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence, prepared a rough sketch map of the place of occurrence, held an inquest over the dead body and also examined some of the witnesses including the informant. During investigation, the Investigating Officer also seized the incriminating weapon (a dao) and also forwarded the dead body of deceased Sushil Ekka to Namsai CHC for post-mortem examination. The second Investigating Officer submitted the charge-sheet against accused Sri Balensious Ekka under Section 302 I. P. C. . The case was committed on 05. 12. 1994 to Deputy Commissioner-cum-District and Sessions Judge, Tezu, Lohit District, for trial. The charge was framed, read over and explained to the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.