Raghunath Ray - (1.) INTRODUCTION: This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3.12.07 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Berhampore, Murshidabad in Sessions Trial No. 1 of 2005 arising out of Sessions Sl. No. 561 of 2004. By the judgment impugned the afore-named appellants were found guilty of the offences punishable u/s. 120B, 302/34 and 207/34 IPC. All these convicts had been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life with a fine of Rs. 5000/- each for the offence u/s. 302/34 IPC and in default of payment of fine each of them was directed to suffer R.I. for a further period of two years vide order dated 21.12.2007. They were further sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years each with a fine of Rs. 2000/- each for the offence under Sections 120B IPC and in default whereof each of them shall suffer R.I. for a further period of six months. They were also sentenced to suffer R.I. for 10 years each with a fine of Rs. 2000/- each for the offence u/s. 307/34 IPC and in default whereof each of them was directed to suffer R.I. for further period of six months. All these sentences were, directed to run concurrently. However, the co-accused Bilal Hossain was found not guilty of the charge of the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 302/345 and 307/34 IPC and was accordingly acquitted of the charge in terms of Section 235(1) CrPC. by the learned Trial Court. First Information Report:
(2.) THE case of the prosecution as unfolded in the FIR, in resume, is as follows:- On 19.1.2004 at about 9.00 A.M. while Samsuddin Mondal, the husband of the informants sister, accompanied by Saiful Islam was returning in a motorcycle from a brick field at Katakopaya, the appellants and others intercepted them near B.S.S.M. Madrasah. THE appellants came out of the house of the co-appellant Mansur Ali and as ordered by Jamal Molla, Hasan Molla hit Saiful Islam with a lathi causing both Saiful and Samsuddin to fall on the ground from their motorcycle. At that point of time, appellant Dedar Sk. assaulted Samsuddin on his shoulder with a dao. THE victim was also assaulted by Kheder Ali with a bhojali. Azhar, however, assaulted the victim with a pasali at random. Sariful Islam and other accused also assaulted Saiful haphazardly with weapons. The informant and Abdul Hamid followed both the victims in another motorcycle. They found Samsuddin and Saiful Islam being assaulted by the appellants. In response to the alarm raised by them the local people rushed to the P.O. but the appellants and their associates managed to escape. The victims were removed to Hospital in a van. However, Samsuddin succumbed to fatal injuries on transit. Saiful was taken to Berhampur hospital in a very precarious condition. Such gruesome murder was committed pursuant to a meeting organized in the house of Bilal Hossain at his Domkol residence. Police Investigation: On the basis of the said FIR lodged by Hazrat Ali Mondal, PW 1 Domkol P.S. case No. 18/2004 u/s. 147/148/149/326/307/302/120B IPC was registered for investigation against Jamal Molla and nineteen others. The case was endorsed to Amit Kr. Ghosh, S.I. by the then O.C. of Domkol P.S. for investigation. In course of investigation, the I.O. visited the P.O. and recorded the statements of a good number of witnesses including eye-witnesses in terms of Section 161 CrPC. He also seized the blood stained wearing apparels of the victims under a proper seizure list (Ext. 2), and also collected the postmortem report of Samsuddin, since deceased. On completion of investigation, he submitted chargesheet u/s. 147/148/149/326/302/120B IPC against the aforenamed appellants as also Bilal Hossain since acquitted and the rest four who were shown as absconders. Trial:
(3.) UPON consideration of ocular evidence of as many as seventeen witnesses examined by the prosecution as also documents relied upon (Ext. 1- series, 2-series, 3-series, 4, 5-series, 6, 7-series, Ext. 11, 12 and 13-series) coupled with evidence of three DWs adduced on behalf of the defence, the learned trial Judge passed an order of conviction against the appellants and also inflicted sentence upon them as indicated earlier. Appeal: Felling aggrieved by the Judgment impugned the present appeal has been preferred by the appellants.;