Decided on September 25,1995

STATE Respondents

Referred Judgements :-


Cited Judgements :-



S.B.SINHA, J. - (1.)This appeal is directed against a judgement and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Port Blair, in Sessions Case No. 11 of 1991 (Sessions Trial No. 1 of 1993) whereby and whereunder the said learned court convicted the accused/appellant for commission of an alleged offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and causing homicidal death to Jatin Mondal, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.
(2.)The incident took place at Village-Ganesh Nagar within P. S. Dinglipur at about 11-30 A.M. to 12 noon on 12-9-88. The accused, the deceased and the material witnesses, namely, P.W.2 Nikhil Biswas, P.W. 3 Kalipada Roy, P.W. 7 Kusum Deori, P.W. 9 Renubala Majhi, P.W. 11 Sudhir Deori, P.W. 12 Narayan Byapari, P.W. 13 Manindra Samaddar and P.W. 15 Basudeb Halder are all residents of the same village. The first information report was lodged by Sudhir Deori, P.W. l 1 at about 7-30 P. M. on the same day. From the first information report (Ext. 2/1) it appears and which fact is also not disputed before us that before reaching the P. S. the informant and others went to Aerial Bay, contacted Gram Prodhan Haran Sardar and took him also to the P. S. It is stated that for reaching Aerial Bay, it takes about 4 hours time in a boat and Diglipur P.S. can be reached from Aerial Bay by bus which takes about half an hour's time. The de eased Jatin Mondal originally was a resident of Beach Dera. He came over to Genesh Nagar and constructed a house on a land which had been reclaimed by somebody else, 2/3 years prior to the occurrence. Allegedly, the deceased had been working under the appellant for more than one year, but he was not paid any remuneration therefor. It was further alleged that in lieu of such remuneration, the appellant promised to the deceased that he would give her eldest in marriage with the deceased. Purna Gayen, P.W. 10 is the only eye witness who had seen the actual commission of offence by the appellant. He stated that at about 11-30/11-45 A. M. on 12-9-88, he saw the appellant eating a guava on his land and a Ballam (spear) was kept against the guava tree. The deceased came at that time, whereupon the appellant asked him as to why he had talked to his daughter when he had made it clear that he would not give his daughter to him in marriage. The deceased allegedly told the appellant that he had worked under him for about a year, but neither any remuneration had been paid to him nor he intends to give his daughter in marriage with him, as promised. The appellant allegedly picked up the Ballam and hit the deceased on the chest, as a result whereof it got embedded therein. The deceased started running away but stumbled over the land of the appellant whereupon the appellant plucked up the said weapon and ran towards his house. P.W. 10, Purna Gayen having witnessed the said occurrence became frightened and started running away and at a distance of about 50/60 cubits, he met Kusum Deori P.W. 7 and Renubala Majhi P.W. 9 who were passing by that road and requested them to report the matter to Gram Prodhan, Sudhir Deori to the effect that the appellant had killed Jatin Mondal by a Ballam. P.W. 7 and P.W. 11 also allegedly saw the deceased and the appellant. P.W. 7, on reaching her house, narrated the incident to Sudhir Deori, who although has been stated to be the Gram Prodhan by some witnesses, but now it appears that he was merely a Matabbar, to whom the villagers used to refer their disputes for his adjudication. Sudhir Deori, P.W. 11 upon hearing the incident started shouting, whereupon Kalippada Roy, P.W. 13, Manindra Smaddar, P.W. 13 and Baburam Halder, P.W. 15 came out and they came to the land of the appellant. Sudhir Deori, Baburam Halder and Kattick Halder started for Diglipur P. S. via Aereal Bay, where they, as stated hereinbefore, met the Prodhan Haran Sardar and took him also to Diglipur P.S. and lodged the first information report, P.W. 19 S. I. R. Vedam thereafter took up the investigation, reached the place of occurrence at about 11-40 P.M. on that date and waited for the day to break. Allegedly, at 4-30 hours in the morning the accused was searched for but was not found. In the meantime, another police constable came to the place of occurrence with a Photographer and the said Photographer took some photographs of the deceased. P.W. 19 prepared the site plan (Ext. 12) made an inquest report (Ext. 3/2) and also seized blood-stained earth (Mat-Ext. V), control earth (Mat-Ext. VI), blood-stained grass (Mat-Ext. VII), control grass (Mat-Ext. VIII) and prepared a seizure list therefor, which was marked as Ext. 4/1. The appellant was allegedly arrested at 4.30 P.M. on 13-9-88 in presence of P.W. 11 and P.W. 15. His house was also searched and a blue coloured under-wear (Mat-Ext. III) which the accused was found wearing containing some stains like blood was seized in relation whereto a seizure list (Ext. 15/1) was prepared. The weapon of offence, namely, Ballam (Mat-Ext. II) was also recovered as per seizure list (Ext. 6/1). All the seized articles were separately packed and sealed. The dead body was brought to Diglipur at 22-15 hours on 13-9-88, the officer-in-charge having started from the place of occurrence at 18-20 hours. The post mortem examination was held at 3 P.M. on 14-9-88 by Dr. R. Tulsidasan (P.W. 18), which is marked Ext. 11. P.W. 18, on external examination found one wound over the anterior chest wall mid-way between the two nipples over right boarder of sternum. The injury was penetrating with clean cut edges which are parallel and slightly curved to each other with sharp angle at the lower side and bruising and raggedness at the Upper angle of the wound. Wound was vertical and has about 4-5 cm. s length piercing the skin, sub cutaneous tissue, sternum, pericardium and then traversed through the right ventricle of heart 2-3 cms. above its apex. In the opinion of the doctor, the said penetrating injury was caused by a sharp pointed cutting weapon. The sternum is cut and pierced through, large amount of blood clots and blood present inside the chest cavity. Pericardium congested and pierced through anterior surface, right ventricle of heart is traversed through the penetrating injury 2 to 3 cms. from its apex. He opined that the death was caused due to homicidal and penetrating injury of the vital organ like heart with massive internal haemorrhage with a sharp pointed cutting weapon with one edge sharp cutting and the other edge blunt. The probable period of time taken between the meal taken by the deceased and death was 3 hours. The said witness, when shown the Ballam (Mat-Ext. II), opined that the said penetrating injury might have been caused by the said Ballam.
(3.)Before the learned trial court, the prosecution in support of its case, examined as many as 19 witnesses. The learned trial court categorised the prosecution witnesses correctly in the following manner :
"(1) The only alleged eye witness to the incident of stabbing by the Ballam is P.W. 10 Purna Gayen.

(2) P.W. 2 Nikil Biswas and P.W. 12 Narayan Byapari are the alleged witnesses to the effect that immediately after the occurrence, when, it is alleged, the accused was holding out threats that no one would be able to save him (the deceased), they saw the accused with Ballam in hand.

(3) P.W. 7 (Kusum Deori) and P.W. 9 (Renubala Maji) are the two ladies whom the alleged eye witness P.W. 10 Purna Gayan met at a distance of hardly 100 cubits away from the P. O. and whom he asked to report the fact to Sudhir Deori P.W. 11 that the accused has killed the deceased Jotin Mondal by stabbing him with a Ballam. These two ladies also claimed that they saw the accused with a Ballam in his hand and the deceased Jotin Mondal lying dead on accused's land.

(4) P.W. 3 (Kalipada Roy), P.W. 11 (Sudhir Deori), P.W. 12 (Narayan Byapari), P.W. 13 (Manindra Samaddar) and P.W. 15 Baburam Halder) are the witnesses who came to the P. O. after the incident was reported to Sudhir Deori (P.W. 11) by Kusum Deori (P.W. 17). And, out of these witnesses, P.W. 11 (Sudhir Deori) and P.W. 15 (Baburam Halder) went to the P. S. where Sudhir Deori lodged the FIR.

(5) P.W. 5(N. Sanjeevan) is police constable who carried the sealed packet containing the case properties and a sealed envelope from the Diglipur P. S. to Aberdeen P. S. Port Blair and P.W. 6 (H. C. Jagdish Singh) carried them from Aberdeen P. S. to CFSL, Calcutta. P.W. 16 (S. I. Madhubala Chattopadhyaya) carried them from CFSL, Calcutta to Aberdeen P. S. and P.W 17 Police Constable Nagabhushanam carried them from Aberdeen P. S. to Diglipur P. S.

(6) The Autopsy Surgeon is P.W. 18 Dr. Tulsidasan.

(7) The main I. O. is S.I.R. Vedam (P.W. 19). P.W. 14 (S. I. S. K. Das) simply submitted the charge-sheet.

(8) P.W. 1 is a hospital Sweeper in whose presence the wearing apparels of the deceased were seized.

(9) P.W. 4 and P.W. 8 were only tendered for cross-examination and their cross-examination was declined by the defence."


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.