Heard Mr. D.Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the appellant and Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Amicus Curie for the respondent accused.

2. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 25-08-2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhubri in Sessions Case No.126/2002 whereby the accused was acquitted of the charge u/s 307/506 of the Indian Penal Code and set at liberty, the State is in appeal.

3. The genesis of this criminal case is a civil dispute between two brothers i.e., the accused and the informant, over a pathway. The informant Shri Sahidur Rahman as the first party had filed a petition before the learned Executive Magistrate, Dhubri u/s 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) alleging that the second party i.e., the accused Shri Motiur Rahman had blocked the pathway by erecting a hut and by planting vegetable crops thereon. The same was registered as Case No.103/1999. The learned Additional District Magistrate, Dhubri by her order dated 22-10-2001 directed removal of the structures and to keep the road free for public use.

4. According to the first information lodged by the informant Shri Sahidur Rahman, on 09-11-2001 at about 1pm when he went alongwith one Executive Magistrate and the police to execute the above order, the accused suddenly appeared with a dagger in his hand with intent to kill him and his brother Shri Jakir Hussain. But he was apprehended by the police, who snatched the dagger and thus they were saved. In the process, the accused also rebuked them by using filthy language. The said first information was treated as FIR and on the basis of the same, Dhubri P.S. Case No.276/2001 u/s 294/307/506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was registered. On completion of the investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet against the accused under the aforesaid provisions of law. The case was thereafter committed to the Court of Sessions for trial.

5. On 29-01-2003, the learned Sessions Judge framed charge against the accused u/s 307 and 506 IPC, which reads as under :-

“First – That you on 09-11-2001 at about 1pm at Chagalchhara Pt- III under Dhubri P.S. while the police party accompanied by the Executive Magistrate were on duty to open a path as per order of the Court, you being armed with a dagger ran towards Saidur Rahman and his brother to assault with intent to kill them and under such circumstances that if by that act you had caused their death, you would have been guilty of murder and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 307 of the Indian Penal Code and within the cognizance of the Court of Sessions at Dhubri. Secondly – That, you on the same date, time and place you committed criminal intimidation by threatening Saidur Rahman and his brother with a dagger to cause injury on their person and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 506 of the Indian Penal Code and within the cognizance of the Court of Sessions at Dhubri”.

6. The charge was read over and explained to the accused to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. The prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses whereas the defence examined none. However, from the statement of the accused recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C., it comes out that his case is one of total denial.

8. On scrutiny of the evidence and after hearing the parties, the learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge levelled against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and, therefore, on benefit of doubt, acquitted the accused.

9. Section 307 IPC deals with the offence of attempt to murder. To constitute the offence of attempt to murder, an act must be done by the accused with the intention and knowledge that if he by that act causes death, he would be guilty of murder. Therefore, firstly, there must be an act attributed to the accused. Secondly, such act must be committed with the intention and knowledge that if that act causes death, he would be guilty of murder.

10. In so far section 506 I

Click Here to Read the rest of this document