SRI JOYTOLAL KEMPRAI AND ANR. Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FOUR accused, Chinmoy Langthasa, Lakhi Kanta Singh Khemon Singh Thousen and Joytolal Kemprai, were prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 302 / 34, Penal Code, for having committed murder of Puma Bahadur Sarki on 29.9.79, before the Deputy Commissioner, N.C. Mills, Haflong, State of Assam. The Four accused were found guilty for the offence under Section 324 / 34, Penal Code and they were convicted as such. except accused Chinmoy Langthasa, the other three accused were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 1.000/ - each, and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further six months simple imprisonment. Accused Chinmoy Langthasa having regard to his age and educational career, was allowed to go on probation for a period of two years, on Execution of bond of Rs. 2,000/ - with one surety of the like amountand in the meantime to keep peace and be of good behaviour during the period. Accused Lakhi Kanta preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 33 (J) of 1982 and the other two accused Khemon Singh Thousen and Joytolal Kamprai,preferred a joint appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 26 of 1982 against the conviction and sentence aforesaid.

(2.) THE prosecution case may be stated briefly as follows. 22.9.79, at about 7 P.M. Lok Bahaour Thapa and deceased Purna Bahadur Sarki were proceeding towards their houses at Natun Basti. When they reached the Railway colony near a held; one person came from behind and started quarreling with deceased. They reached near a Puja Pandel celebrated in that year, when accused Lakhi Kanta Singh brought the other three accused. The four accused assaulted both of them. The decreased defended himself with the help of the umbrella which had with him. The witness, who sustained injury on his body ran towards the shop of one Nepali and waited there about 15 minutes. The deceased did not turn up and then left for home. Meanwhile, Priyatosh Das, who was the driver Railway, Haflong found a person lying on the ground the railway field in the evening of 29.9.79, He reported (Sic) to the Police on duly in the Puja Mandap in the railway (Sic) The police came and took the injured in a Police truck, ears that the injured succumbed to the injuries. The police (Sic) investigation by registering, case for the offence under 302, Penal Code, On a report by S.I. Diptendra made on 1.10.79, investigation was taken up. Inquest was the dead body and thereafter, post mortem examination (Sic) by the Medical officer. Dr. S.K. Sarkar on 30.9.79 course of the investigation, the police also seised one umbrella produced by the accused Lakhi Kant Singh. All the four accused gave confessions before the Magirstrate Sh A.K. Malakar. Confessions of accused Lakhi Kanta. Khemon Singh Thousen and Chinmoy Langthasa were recorded on 10.10.79 and they are Exhibits 6, 7 and 8 respectively. Confession of accused Joytolal Kemprai Ext. 9, was recorded on 11.10.79. Identification parade was conducted on 22.10.79 before the Magistrate S.C. Longmailal, P.W. 11, in which P.W. 2, Lok Bahadur Thape, identified only one accused Lakhi Kanta Singh but he failed to identify the, other three accused. Investigating officer examined a number of witnesses and submitted charge sheet against the four accused to stand their trial under Section 302 / 34, Penal Code. The learned Deputy Commissioner found the accused guilty of the offence Under Sections 324 / 34 I.P.C. and awarded sentence as aforesaid on the three accused except accused Chinmoy Largthasa.

(3.) THERE is no doubt that the deceased died from the injuries sustained on 29.9.79. The Medical officer who held autopsy on the dead body found the following injuries, viz. (i) one incised and penetrating wound 21 1/2 above and lateral to the right sterno clavicular joint transversely placed length 1/2", breadth 1/2", at the middle, tapering to the pointed ends anteriorly and posteriorly; depth 11" directed backwards and downwards involving the vessels of the right side neck and other soft tissues at the site of the injury, In his opinion, the injuries were antimortem and the injured died of scyncope (shock and haemmorrhage), as a result of the injuries sustained on the body.