PUTUL MAJHI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 7.8.2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nagaon, in Sessions Case No. 204(N) of 2001. By the aforesaid judgment and order the accused/appellant has been convicted under Section 302, IPC and has been sentenced, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. A fine of Rs. 2,000, in default, to suffer R.I. for six months more has also been imposed.

(2.) THE short case of the prosecution is that on 27.12.2000 at about 9.30 a.m. one Pradip Mohan, Manager, Burrapahar Tea Estate, lodged a FIR in the Bagori Police Outpost under Jakhalabondha Police Station alleging that he has been informed by the Unit Secretary and President of the Assam Chah Mazdoor Sangha, Burrapahar Tea Estate, that the accused/appellant had killed one old couple, namely, Etuwa Goala and Raiboti Goala at about 2.30 p.m. of 26.12.2000. On the basis of the aforesaid FIR lodged a G.D. Entry (No. 344) was recorded in the General Diary of the Bagari Outpost and the FIR was forwarded to the Jakhalabondha Police Station for registration of a case. Thereafter, Jakhalabondha PS. Case No. 105/2000 under Section 302, IPC was registered. PW6, Sri Bhabendra Nath Kalita, S.I. of police was entrusted with the investigation of the case. The Investigating Officer along with the police party proceeded to the place of occurrence, prepared a sketch map and examined witnesses whose statements were recorded under Section 161, Cr.PC. Inquest was held and the dead bodies were sent for post mortem examination. On receipt of the report of post mortem and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed against the accused/appellant under Section 302, IPC. The offence being exclusively triable by the court of Sessions, the learned Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kaliabor, by order dated 28.8.2001, committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions at Nagaon. In the Sessions Court charge was framed under Section 302, IPC against the accused/appellant who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the trial held six witnesses were examined by the prosecution and two more witnesses were examined as court witnesses. The defence did not adduce any evidence. However, the statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Section 313, Cr.PC. Thereafter, at the conclusion of the trial, the accused/appellant has been convicted and sentenced, as aforesaid, giving rise to the present appeal.

(3.) PW 1, Kanu Tanti, is the Secretary of the Burrapahar Tea Garden Labour Union. According to this witness, one Parameswar Madraji (CW1) had informed him of the incident thereafter this witness came to the house of Parameswar and found Raiboti lying dead in the courtyard of the house of Parameswar with cut injury on the neck. According to this witness, the deceased Etuwa was also lying with his neck cut. Thereafter, this witness informed the garden manager of the incident. PW1 has further deposed that he came across Bapon Majhi (CW2), i.e., husband of the accused/appellant, who informed him that it is his wife, i.e., the accused/appellant who had killed the (sic) with a dao. PW1 has further deposed that thereafter police arrived at the scene and the accused/appellant confessed her guilt before the police, handed over a dao from her house after telling the police and others present that she had kept the dao in her house after cleaning it. PW1 is also a witness to the seizure of the allegedly offending weapon and wearing apparels of the accused/appellant made by seizure list exhibited as Ext -1. In cross -examination this witness has been categorical in stating that it is only upon being intimidated by the police personnel present at the place of occurrence that the accused had delivered the dao and clothes from inside her house.