The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on eyewitness accounts and medical evidence to establish guilt, and the determination that non-examination of a material witness did not warrant adverse inference.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 02.11.2007 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2 (FTC), Tinsukia in Sessions Case No. 135(T)/2006. By the impugned judgment the accused appellant has been convicted under Section 447, 323 and 302 IPC and thereby sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 months, 3 months and imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default further rigorous imprisonment for 3 months respectively. The prosecution case that led to the trial is as follows:

On 12.11.2005 at about 10 a.m. the accused trespassed into the house compound of the deceased and assaulted the deceased, Golok Gohain by means of a dao. Hearing the alarm raised by the victim, his daughter, Smt. Padmini Buragohain came out of the house and she was assaulted. One Babu Chakma who was also present at the relevant time also sustained injuries caused by the accused. When the wife of the victim came in their rescue she was also assaulted. Injured Golok Gohain was immediately shifted to hospital where he succumbed to his injuries after two days.

An FIR being logged by the wife of the deceased. Police registered a case under Section 447, 326 IPC. As the deceased succumbed to his injuries, 302 IPC was added and on completion of investigation, chargesheet under Section 447/302 IPC was submitted against the accused.

The learned trial Court framed the charges under Section 427, 323, 302 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried. During trial the prosecution examined altogether 14 witnesses. Thereafter, the statement of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein he denied the allegations leveled against him and stated that there was quarrel between Babu Chakma and deceased Golok Gohain. However, no defence evidence was adduced.

2. We have heard Mr. Bibekananda Gogoi, learned Amicus Curie appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as Mr. D. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State Respondent.

3. PW1, Smt. Prabhati Buragohain, wife of the deceased, PW2, Smt. Padmini Buragohain, their daughter, PW3, Anil Buragohain, one of the relative of the deceased and PW5, Babu Chakma have given eyewitness account of the incident.

4. PW1 stated that on the date of occurrence at about 9 a.m. her husband sitting in the verandah of his house was talking with Babu Chakma. PW1 was taking bath at the tubewell. In the meantime accused Monai Tanti came to their house compound and inflicted three cut blows on the abdomen of her husband with a 'khamti' dao. She witnessed the incident and called her daughter, Padmini who was inside the house. Padmini and Babu Chakma offered resistance and thereby Babu Chakma also sustained injuries. While Padmini was making efforts to take her father inside the house, she was assaulted by the accused. PW1 requested the accused not to assault her as she was sick but the accused told that he would not consider any sickness and destroy all. When her husband fled away the accused chased him and felling him under a banana tree, gave subsequent blows by means of the dao. PW1 raised alarm and the neighbours came in their rescue. Her husband was taken to Kakapathar Hospital where from he was referred to Tinsukia Hospital for treatment. Babu Chakma was also treated at the hospital. From Tinsukia Hospital her husband was shifted to Dibrugarh Medical College where he succumbed to his injuries. She lodged the FIR.

5. PW2, Padmini Buragohain deposed that she was inside the house while her father was sitting out in the verandah alongwith Babu Chakma. Hearing the alarm raised by her mother she came out in a run. She saw the accused inflicting dao blows on her father. When she attempted to save her father, the accused inflicted dao blows on her left arm. She then raised hue and cry. Her uncle Anil Buragohain came and then accused fled away. She further deposed that her father attempted to run away but the accused chased after him and gave sub