I.A. Ansari, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order, dated 04.05.2006, passed, in Sessions Case No. 91 of 2005, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Sonitpur, Tezpur, convicting the accused -appellant under Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - and, in default of payment of fine, suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 (two) months. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be described as under: On 12.02.2005, at about 7:30 p.m., accused Ratan Suren assaulted his father, Boga Soren, by giving him blows with a lathi. As a result of the assault, Boga Soren sustained fracture of his temporal bone as well as of his right frontal bone. Because of the injuries sustained by him, Boga Soren died and his elder brother, Sing Rai Chauhan, informed their neighbour, Bhondaram Murmu, that the accused had killed his father by assaulting with a bamboo lathi. Having come to know of the occurrence, when PW 1 went to the house of the accused, he saw the dead body of Boga Soren lying at the verandah of his house with injury on his cheek, face and nose and when PW 1 asked him (accused), the accused told him that he had killed his father out of anger. Following the occurrence, Tilak Soren, brother of deceased Boga Soren, went to Thelamara Police Station and lodged there written ejahar (Ext. 3) alleging therein that his elder brother, Boga Soren, had been killed by accused Ratan Soren by giving him blows with a lathi. Basing on the said ejahar and treating the same as First Information Report (in short, 'FIR'), a case was registered against the accused under Section 302, IPC. During the course of investigation, police visited the place of occurrence, held inquest over the said dead body, prepared the sketch map and also got postmortem examination performed on said dead body. On completion of investigation, charge -sheet was laid, under Section 302, IPC, against the accused -appellant.
(2.) AT the trial, when a charge under Section 302, IPC was framed against the accused -appellant, he pleaded not guilty thereto. In support of their case, prosecution examined altogether 8 (eight) witnesses. The accused -appellant was, then, examined under Section 313, Cr.PC and, in his examination aforementioned, the accused -appellant denied that he had committed the offence, which was alleged to have been committed by him, the case of the defence being that of denial. No evidence was adduced by the defence.
(3.) HAVING , however, found the accused -appellant guilty of the offence, which he stood charged with, the learned trial Court convicted him accordingly and passed sentence against him as mentioned above. Aggrieved by his conviction and the sentence, which has been passed against him, the accused, as a convicted person, has preferred this appeal.;