Prasanta Kumar Saikia, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 19.10.2012 rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhemaji in Sessions Case No. 3(DH)2011 convicting the appellant Sri Ajit Doley of offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default, R.I. for another period of 6 months for the offence U/s. 302 IPC and R.I. for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- i.d., R.I. another period of 3 months for the offence aforesaid. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment, the appellant Sri Ajit Doley (hereinafter referred to as the accused person) has preferred this appeal from jail citing several infirmities in the judgment under challenge.

2. We have heard Mr. R. De, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the accused person. Also heard Ms. S. Jahan, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent.

3. The case projected in the FIR dated 25.05.2010 and in subsequent trial, in short, is that on 25.05.2010 at about 5/6 pm, the accused person caused death of his daughter, namely, Rumia Doley, aged about one and a half year by inflicting dao blows and thereafter buried her body in a place not far from his house. Subsequently, the villagers suspected that the accused person had killed his daughter. Therefore, he was apprehended following his he confessed to his guilt admitting that he killed his daughter and buried her body in a place not far from his house.

4. In that connection, an FIR was lodged with the In-charge of Sissiborgaon Police Out Post. On receipt of the FIR, I/C Sissiborgaon Police Out Post made a GD. Entry on such FIR and forwarded the FIR to the Officer-in-Charge, Silapathar Police Station for registering a case. On receipt of the FIR, Officer-in-charge, Silapathar Police Station registered a case vide Silapathar P.S. Case No. 143/2010 U/s. 302/201 IPC and ordered investigation into the case.

5. In due course, I/O, Sri Atul Hajarika, In-charge of Sissiborgaon Police Out Post visited the place of occurrence, examined the witnesses, arrested the accused person and disinterred the body of the deceased, sent the body of the deceased to Civil Hospital, Dhemaji for post mortem examination, did other needful and on completion of the investigation, he submitted charge sheet under Section 302/201 IPC against the accused person and forwarded him to the Court to stand his trial there for the offence aforesaid.

6. The learned Magistrate, before whom charge sheet was so laid, committed the case to the Court of Session since the offence under Section 302 IPC is exclusively triable by Court of Session. The learned Sessions Judge, Dhemaji on receipt of the case on commitment and on hearing the learned counsel for the parties, framed charge U/s. 302 IPC against the accused person and the charge, so framed, on being read over and explained to the accused person, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. During trial, the prosecution had examined as many as 11 (eleven) witnesses including the informant, the M.O. who conducted autopsy on the body of the deceased as well as the I.O. of the case. The statement of the accused person was also recorded U/s. 313 CrPC. The plea of the accused person was of total denial. He, however, did not adduce any evidence in support of such claim.

8. On conclusion of the trial and on hearing the arguments, advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the learned Sessions Judge, Dhemaji was pleased to convict the accused person of offence U/s. 302 IPC and sentenced Mm punishment as aforesaid. It is that judgment which has been assailed in the present appeal.

9. We have heard Mr. R. De, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing for the appellant and Ms. S. Jahan, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent.

10. Mr. Dey, learned Amicus Curiae, submits that the judgment under challenge is unsustainable since there is no legal evidence to con