SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(Gau) 790

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (AGARTALA BENCH)
Tinlianthang Vaiphei and Utpalendu Bikas Saha, JJ.
Dilip Debbarma - Appellants
Vs.
State of Tripura - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (J) No(s). 33 of 2006 and 71 of 2009
Decided on : 05.10.2010

Advocates appeared:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: A.K. Bhowmik, M. Debbarma and R. Dutta, Advs.
For Respondents/Defendant: D. Sarkar, Adv.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 449, 364 and 302 - Criminal Appeal - Rigorous imprisonments for life - Penalty - Two accused persons faced trial on charges for kidnapping and murdering deceased -Learned Additional Sessions Judge, upon trial held the charges proved against them and they being held guilty under the aforesaid sections were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months - Held, As it is seen from the evidence of PW2 that the Appellants were among the extremists while they trespassed her house at night and from the evidence of PW6 it also appears that the extremists gave a kick to deceased and thereafter, took away both the deceased forcibly on the point of gun and the prosecution witnesses came forward with vivid story of the incident and also identified the accused-Appellants knowing fully well that they and their associates belonged to extremist group and against the extremist normally people do not come forward to adduce evidence as after adducing evidence their lives would be under threat, therefore, if Court cumulatively take the aforesaid facts with the evidence of doctor PW13, then there is no other option except to come to a conclusion that within all human probability the alleged murder was committed by the Appellants and their associates and no other else - Therefore, it can be easily said that the Appellants committed the offences punishable and resultantly the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial court does not suffer from any infirmity calling for interference by Court - Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT

U.B. Saha, J.

1. Two accused persons namely, Shri Dilip Debbarma (A1) and Shri Bipin Debbarma (A2) faced trial on charges under Sections 449, 364 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC') for kidnapping and murdering deceased Bipul Debbarma and Ramabrata Debbarma. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khowai, West Tripura upon trial held the charges under Sections 449, 364 and 302, IPC proved against them and they being held guilty under the aforesaid sections were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000 each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The aforesaid conviction and sentence were passed vide judgment and order dated 6.5.2005 in Case No. ST 56(WT/K) of 2003. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order of conviction and sentence, the accused preferred the aforesaid two appeals. As the aforesaid two appeals are from a common judgment and order of conviction and sentence those were taken up for hearing by us together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

2. Heard Mr. A.K. Bhowmik learned senior counsel appearing for the Appellant in Crl.A. No. 33/06 Shri Dilip Debbarma and Mr. R. Dutta learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant in Crl.A. No. 72/09, Shri Bipin Debbarma. Also heard Mr. D. Sarkar, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the Respondent State.

3. According to the written complaint lodged by one Shri Kritibash Debbarma (PW1) on 24.8.1998 to the Officer-in-Charge of Khowai Police Station, on 23.8.1998 at around 10/10.30 p.m. a group of unidentified men stormed into his house and dragged his elder brother Bipul Debbarma and his neighbour Ramabrata Debbarma on the point of gun. While searching on 24.8.1998 at about 9/9.30 a.m. the dead bodies of his elder brother Bipul and his neighbour Ramabrata were recovered from the east of Otlabari with bullet and multiple cut injuries on their person. On receipt of the aforesaid information the O/C. of Khowai Police Station S.I. Sukhamoy Shil (PW14) treated the same as FIR and registered a police case being Khowai PS Case No. 84/98 under Sections449/364/302 read with Section 34, IPC and 27 of the Arms Act and took up the investigation. After taking the investigation the aforesaid Sub-Inspector (PW14) rushed to the spot.

4. In the course of investigation, PW14 first prepared the inquest report of the dead bodies of the deceased and arranged for holding post mortem examination. He also seized some bloodstained earth from the place of occurrence by preparing seizure list. Thereafter, he visited the house of PW1 wherefrom the deceased were kidnapped and the place wherefrom subsequently the dead bodies of the deceased were recovered and accordingly, he prepared site plans with separate indexes. He also examined the available witnesses and recorded their statement under Section161, Code of Criminal Procedure. On 6.10.1998, he (PW14) arrested accused Dilip Debbarma. Again, on his prayer made to the court on 21.10.1998, the other two accused namely, Ratan Debbarma and Bipin Debbarma were shown arrested in connection with the case who were detained in custody in connection with another case. Thereafter, the investigation of the case was handed over to PW15, Inspector Priya Lal Majumder who recorded the statement of the remaining witnesses under Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure and on completion of the investigation filed charge sheet against the accused persons under Sections 449/364/302 read with Section 34, IPC against the accused persons namely, Dilip Debbarma, Appellant in Crl.A. (J) No. 33 of 2006. Ratan Debbarma, Bipin Debbarma, Appellant in, Cri.A. (J) No. 72 of 2009 and Bijoy Debbarma showing the last two accused persons absconders.

5. Upon receipt of the charge sheet, the learned S.D.J.M. Khowai being satisfied took cognizance of the offence as mentioned in the charge sheet and the case being exclusively triable by the court of sessions committed the same to the learn

















































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top