NADIRA PATHERYA,J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the order of conviction and sentence dated 22nd May, 2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Court No.3, Purulia, in Sessions Trial No. 50A/07 arising out of Sessions Case No.28/07 whereby and where under the accused appellant was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. The accused appellant was directed to suffer life imprisonment with fine of L 6,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months.
(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the accused appellant and the victim girl were married for over a year. The accused appellant suspected the victim girl of having an illicit relation. This was the bone of contention between the accused appellant and the victim girl. On 17.10.2006, a noise was heard coming from the house of the accused appellant and the victim girl. P.W.1, the maternal uncle of the victim girl heard the noise and went to the matrimonial home of the victim girl. The accused appellant was asked to open the door but the said went unheeded. After sometime, the accused appellant did open the door, walked out of the door and tried to run away. He was, however, restricted from fleeing and on entry into the room from which the accused appellant had escaped, the dead body of the victim girl was found in the room with bleeding injuries. P.W.1 then filed Kotshila P.S. Case No.13/2006 dated 17.10.06 under Sections 498A/302 I.P.C. and on the basis of the said complaint filed investigation was initiated and Charge sheet submitted. The case was then forwarded to the Court of Sessions wherefrom it was transferred to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.3, Purulia. Charge was framed and the same was read out and explained to the accused appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and sought to be tried. 15 witnesses were examined by the prosecution. On behalf of the defence no evidence was adduced. Relying on the oral and documentary evidence, the Trial Court passed the order of conviction and sentence. Being aggrieved by the said order of conviction and sentence, this Appeal has been filed.
(3.) Counsel for the accused appellant submits that P.Ws. 2 to 8 and 12 are post-occurrence witnesses. None has witnessed the incident. P.W.1 is the FIR maker and he too is an interested and related witness. There is no secrecy of the act being committed. There was dispute and quarrel between the accused and the victim girl. Shouts could also be heard from the room, the door of which was bolted. In spite of the door being banged, the accused appellant could not hear the said banging as he was deprived of rationale thinking, was not in his sense and the offence committed was as a result of grave provocation. There was never any intent on the part of the accused appellant to kill the victim girl with the axe on that day. There is also no evidence of the murder being planned. Therefore, no offence under Section 302 I.P.C. was committed by the accused appellant and if at all an offence was committed, it will attract the exceptions to Section 300 I.P.C. Therefore, the sentence be altered from Section 302 I.P.C. to Section 304 I.P.C. No attempt was made by the accused appellant to conceal the offending weapon and it was on the basis of his statement made under Section 27 of the Evidence Act that the offending weapon was recovered.;