Ishan Chandra Das, J. - (1.) IN this Criminal Appeal, the appellants assailed the judgment and order of conviction dated March 29th 2007 and March 31st 2007 respectively recorded by ld. Addl. Sessions Judge Birbhum at Rampurhat in S.C. No. 72 of 1996 (S.T. No. 13 of 2002) where the appellants were convicted for committing the offence punishable under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and all of them were sentenced to suffer Imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/ - each in default to suffer imprisonment of one year more and further sentenced to suffer imprisonment for five years for the offence punishable under Sections 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - in default, to suffer imprisonment of 6 months where both the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently with a rider to set off and 80% of the fine amount, if realized, to be paid to the widow of the victim.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case, as revealed from the written complaint dated 3rd February 1994 is that the de facto complainant Naimul Sk. and one Masid Sk. were being asked by victim Haider Sk. of village Mukhlishpur started their journey to the house of Samail Sk. of village Fatepur at about 5 P.M. on 2nd February 1994 for the purpose of business and on their way to the place of destination, they called one Enamul Sk. of village Patagachi to accompany them. After staying there at the house of Samail Sk. for a couple of hours and taking light refreshment, the above -noted 4 persons (including victim Haider Sk.) started their return journey to village Muklishpur at about 8 -00 P.M. and when they reached nearby an orchard of Sadapur Math (field), the 4 appellants Sairuddin Sk., Lalu Sk., Nakfuru Sk. & Reazuddin Sk (who are the inhabitants of village Muklishpur) appeared before them, all on a sudden and asked them as to why they went to the house of Samail Sk. of village Fatepur and instantly they started assaulting the de facto complainant with a sword/dagger and he got severe bleeding injuries. To this victim Haider Sk. tried to prevent the 4 miscreants who again started assaulting Haider Sk. aimlessly with sword, hansua, dagger etc. The de facto complainant out of fear and to save himself hid behind a heap of straw and saw all the appellants to pull Haider to the mustard field, killed him and left the place hurriedly towards Muklishpur. Thereafter the de facto complainant went to village Patagachi, informed the matter to one Sukchand Sk., Ujir Sk. & others who instantly rushed to the spot being accompanied by the de facto complainant and found the dead body of Haider Sk., his head being severed from the body. The matter was not reported to the Officer -in -Charge of Muraroi Police Station instantly but in the next morning, due to bad weather and the Officer -in -Charge of the P.S. concerned was requested to initiate legal action against the assailants. Consequently the charge -sheet was submitted against these appellants, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where the appellants pleaded their innocence at the commencement of trial but ld. Sessions Judge after due conclusion of trial, on examination of 13 witnesses for the prosecution, 5 Court -witnesses and one Defence -witness found these appellants guilty of the offence punishable under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, convicted and sentenced them to suffer imprisonment for life and 5 years for the offence punishable under Sections 302 & 201 of the Indian Penal Code respectively and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/ - & Rs. 5,000/ - in default to suffer imprisonment for 1 year and 6 months respectively with a rider that both the sentences to run concurrently subject to set off, as pointed out earlier.
(3.) NOW , the only point for consideration left before us - whether ld. Trial Court was justified in convicting these appellants and sentencing them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine, as noted above.;