2009 Supreme(Gau) 403
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
I.A.Ansari,P.K.Musahary, JJ.
State of Arunachal Pradesh -Appellant
Versus
Ronda Basumatary -Resopndent
Criminal Reference (H) No. 08 (AP) of 2007
Decided On : 09-06-2009
N.Lowang, M.Pertin
Headnote:
Amendment Act of 2005 - Section 30 - Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945 - Indian penal code, 1860 - Sections 302/376/448/34 - Criminal procedure code,1973 - Section 366 - Quash FIR - Consideration - Acquittal - Imprisonment - Appeal against Conviction - Lodged a written FIR with Officer-in-Charge Police Station alleging that in night some unknown persons entered hut of his laborers and killed his labors his wife and his elder daughter - Information was received and a crime being P. S. Case was registered under Section 302 Indian penal code Officer-in-Charge of said police station himself took over charge of investigation who visited place of occurrence found dead bodies his wife and daughter held inquest on dead bodies and sent same for post-mortem examination after taking photographs from different angles - Accused also disclosed involvement of another accused who was also arrested by police and were forwarded to Court. While in custody accused attempted to commit suicide inside latrine by cutting his neck with a beer bottle - Post-mortem reports in respect of deceased persons were obtained wherein it is mentioned that all dead bodies bore penetrating wounds caused by a sharp weapon like dagger/knife on their persons - Held, There is yet another aspect which escaped consideration by trial Court while awarding death penalty - Admittedly there were accused persons including present convict in committing heinous crime of gang rape and murder of deceased persons - Among them one accused has been acquitted for want of evidence against him he being not identified by child eyewitness - Other accused Sri Apollo escaped from judicial custody and absconded till date - Said absconding accused could not be brought to justice - Who was third accused whom child eyewitness could not identify and whom police failed to apprehend - Our minds are perturbed by putting question to ourselves as to whether it would be justified and fair enough to take life of convict alone by way of confirming and allowing to execute death sentence - Our judicial conscience would hardly allow us to sustain death penalty against this convict alone while allowing other accused persons to move at large - Considering matter in its entirety in light of principle of law enunciated in various decisions in respect of capital punishment and sentencing system based on changing approach to changing criminality in modern society and also present strong trend against death penalty court fail to persuade ourselves to sustain or confirm death sentence awarded against present convict as imposed by trial court vide impugned judgment and order - Order accordingly
This is a reference under Section 366 of Cr. P. C., 1973, read with Section 30 of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945, as amended vide Amendment Act of 2005, for confirmation of sentence of death passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Basar, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh, in respect of convict Ronda Basumatary who was convicted and sentenced to death under Section 302 vide judgment and order dated 31.08.2007 passed in BSR/SESS No. 250/03.
2. We have heard Mr. N. Lowang, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh and Mr. M. Pertin, learned counsel appearing for the convict, as amicus curiae.
3. The prosecution tells its story as follows: One Sri Tagon Darang of Rayang Village
lodged a written FIR with the Officer-in-Charge, Ruksin Police Station alleging that in the night of 07.08.2001, around 10.30 PM, some unknown persons entered the hut of his labourers and killed his labours Lakhiram Narzary, his wife and his elder daughter. The information was received at 0900 hours and a crime being Ruksin P. S. Case No. 28/2001 was registered under Section 3021. P. C.. The Officer-in-Charge of the said police station himself took over the charge of investigation who visited the place of occurrence, found the dead bodies of Lakhiram Narzary, his wife Navela Narzary and daughter Manjula Narzary, held the inquest on the dead bodies and sent the same for post-mortem examination after taking photographs from different angles. He drew a rough sketch map of the place of occurrence and also recorded the statements of all available witnesses but found no clue of the culprits. However, during the course of investigation, he received some secret information from his engaged sources about the involvement of accused Sri Ronda Basumatary and Apollo Basumatary in the aforesaid murder case. Accordingly, he conducted the raid but the accused persons aforementioned managed to escape. In the meantime, the villagers were also alerted to apprehend the culprits and on 10.08.2001, the local public managed to catch Sri Apollo Basumatary and brought him to the Ruksin Police Station. On being interrogated, he confessed the commission of the crime alongwith Sri Ronda Basumatary. Thereafter, on 12.08.2001, Ronda Basumatary @ Romen Basumatary was nabbed from an agricultural field. During investigation, he also confessed the commission of crime and his confession led to recovery of the crime weapon (a knife) which was kept hidden in the Pineapple Garden at Milanpur village. The accused Sri Ronda Basumatary also disclosed the involvement of another accused Sri Amren Basumatary who was also arrested by the police and were forwarded to the Court. While in custody, accused Ronda Basumatary attempted to commit suicide inside the latrine by cutting his neck with a beer bottle. The post-mortem reports in respect of the deceased persons were obtained wherein it is mentioned that all the dead bodies bore penetrating wounds caused by a sharp weapon like dagger/knife on their persons. As per the said post-mortem reports, the deceased Manjula Basumatary was raped before she was killed. A prima-facie case having been established during investigation, the Investigating Officer laid the charge-sheet against - (1) Sri Ronda Basumatary @ Romen Basumatary, (2) Apollo Basumatary, and (3) Sri Amren Basumatary, under Sections 302/376/448/34 of I. P. C.. Charges were framed against the aforesaid accused persons under Sections 302/376/450/34 of I. P. C. and the same having been read-over and explained to them, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4. In order to prove the charges against the accused persons, the prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses including one child eyewitness, son of the deceased parents. The accused Sri Ronda Basumatary and Sri Amren Basumatary examined themselves and one Sri Susanto Brahma in their defence. The accused Sri Apollo Basumatary, in the meantime, escaped from the judicia