High Court
Case Details
Crl.A. 222/2006 BEFORE THE HON’BLE DR. (MRS.) JUSTICE INDIRA SHAH Heard Mr. J. Laskar, learned counsel for the appellant appearing on beha
Legal Reasoning
(Indira Shah,J.) 1. lf of Mr. B. Banerjee. Also heard Ms. A. Begum, learned Addl. P.P., Assam. 2. The appellants have challenged the legality and validity of the judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge in Session case No.42 of 2001, convicting the appellant under Section 304 Part II IPC and sentenced him to undergo impriso nment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to undergo rigo rous imprisonment for further period of six months. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that there was a land dispute between the accused persons and informant parties. On request of the parties the Revenue Officials visited the place of occurrence with a view to demarcate the land of the parties. They found that there was standing paddy on the plot of land and th erefore, the officials suggested to defer the date of demarcation till the harve sting of the paddy. Atiqur @ Atiqur Rahman (deceased) requested the Revenue Offi cials to complete the demarcation on the very day which enraged the accused pers ons and they attacked Atiqur Rahman and assaulted him by means of sharp & deadly weapons causing injuries Atiqur Rahman. He (Atiqur) was taken to Sonai hospital by the police personnel, there from he referred to SMCH at Silchar where he suc cumbed to his injuries. FIR being lodged, Sonai P.S. Case No. 33/97 was register ed and on completion of the investigation charge sheet under Section 147/ 148/ 1 49/ 447/ 341/ 566 IPC was submitted against the accused persons. 4. During the trial, charges under Section 148, 149, 302 IPC were framed ag ainst the accused persons to which they pleaded may not guilty. In order to prov e their case, the prosecution examined altogether sixteen witnesses. The accused persons in their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. denied the alleg ations levelled against them and pleaded that they were innocent. However, they declined to adduce any defence evidence. 5. As per post-mortem report, the dead body of Atiqur Rahman (deceased) was examined by Doctor H. Sharma (P.W.6) and his findings are as follows: (cid:28)Injuries: An incised wound assuring 3 x 1x 1 cm present over the left side of the 1. neck in horizontal plane on left surface and one nylon stitch rendering it found levelling from above downwards measuring 3 x 1x 1 cms. 2. Stab wound entire medical part of the right arm measuring 10 x .5 x 2 cm and wound was stitched. 3. Stab wound medical surface of the right calf (stitched) measuring 1 x .5 x 3 cms and the wound was stitched. Graze abrasion vertically over the left cheek. Contusion of left tempero parietal scalp. Depressed comminuted fracture of left side from to temporo partietal bon 4. 5. 6. es in an area of 11 x 8 cm. 7. Extradural haemotoma over left temporo parietal region 8 x 6 cm in size (discerns shaped) pressing over the left side temporo pariental lobes causing fl attening of the brain surface at that side. 8. Contusion of cerebral cortex on left side at junction of temporo parieta l lobe. The brain was congested and adematous. The brain was congested and adema tous. The abdominal and thorasic organs were congested. The stomach contained 30 0 ml file coloured fluid. (cid:29) 6. According to the doctor (P.W. 6), the cause of death was come due to car nio-cerebral injuries. All injuries were antemortem and homicidal in nature. The re is no dispute that death of the deceased was due to the injuries sustained by him and death was homicidal in nature. 7. Aklu Mia Mazumdar (P.W.1) father of the deceased lodged the FIR. Monjir Ali (P.W.2), Rahim Uddin (P.W.3), Ilas Ali (P.W.4), Abdul Qyum (P.W.5) and Sanuh ar Ali (P.W.8) witnessed the occurrence. They had deposed that Atiqur Rahman (de ceased) insisted the Revenue Officials to complete the demarcation of the land o n the very day itself. The accused persons became angry and the accused Nazrul g ave a dao blow on the neck of Atiqur Rahman. Thereafter, accused Samsul Ali atta cked the deceased by means of a lathi blow on head and accused Sirajul made a do a blow on the hand of Atiqur. The Revenue Officials and police personnel who wer e present at that time, removed the deceased to the local hospital. The evidence of P.W.1, 2, 3, 4, 5 & 8 has been corroborated by the evidence of Abdul Motin T alukdar (P.W.9), ASI of Police, who was also present at the place of the occurre nce. Nazrul Islam Mazumdar (P.W.10) arrived at the place of occurrence after the incident. Nazrul Islam Mazumdar and Sunam Uddin Barbhuiya (P.W.11) are seizure witnesses. Parimal Nath (P.W.16) witnessed the inquest on the dead body of the d eceased. Sanuwar Ali Borbhuiyan (P.W.14) & Binoy Kr. Deb (P.W.15) both Sub-Inspe ctors of Police, investigated the case. Abdul Sahid Majumdar (P.W.12) turned hos tile to the prosecution. However, he deposed that he heard that Atiqur sustained severe injuries and succumbed to his injuries on the following day. 8. The learned Trial Court has elaborately discussed the evidence, adduced by the prosecution witnesses and found that the evidence of prosecution witnesse s are natural, illucid and without any break. There is nothing to disbelieve the veracity of the prosecution witnesses. However, the trial Court held that the i njuries were not inflicted with an intention to cause death of the victim and th e accused persons were not the member of unlawful assembly as they did nothing i n prosecuting of their common object. The accused Nazrul Haque and Samsal Haque Laskar, Sirajul Haque Laskar were found guilty under Section 304 Pt 11 IPC and a ccordingly they were convicted and sentenced. 9. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellants have already undergone the imprisonment as per sentence imposed on them and the reasons of the Trial Court needs no interference. 10. d. 11. In view of above the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court is uphel This criminal appeal is dismissed. Return the LCR.