Prasanta Kumar Saikia, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 10.04.2012, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Tinsukia in Sessions Case No. 105(T)/2010 convicting Smti Krishna Boruah, the appellant herein, of offence u/s. 302 IPC and sentencing her imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- (Rupees Three Thousand) i.d., S.I. for another 3(three) months for the offence aforesaid. Learned Sessions Judge further ordered the appellant to pay Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) as compensation to the victim and in the event of realization of such compensation, the entire amount was ordered to be paid to the wife of the deceased.

2. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment, the appellant Smti. Krishna Baruah (herein after also referred to as the accused person) preferred this appeal citing several infirmities in the judgment under challenge.

3. We have heard Mr. N. Dutta, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. T. Deuri and Mr. N.N.B. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellant and also heard Mr. K.A. Majumdar, learned Addl. PP, appearing for the State.

4. The case, projected by the prosecution, in short, is that on 09.11.2009 at about 10.30 p.m., Smti. Krishna Baruah, wife of late Mahim Baruah, reached Bordubi Police Station along with her son Pall and her father in law Sri Kamal Baruah and informed police that on said night at about 8.30 p.m. one Trailukya Dihingia (since deceased and herein after referred to as the victim) came to her house and tried to kill her with a dao. In order to save her from such assault, she snatched away the aforesaid dao and inflicted blows with it on the victim for which he succumbed to such injuries soon thereafter.

5. On the basis of such information, police made a G.D. entry vide G.D. Entry No. 152 dated 9.11.2009 and one Jatin Ch. Neog, S.I. of police, was entrusted to investigate the case. Such G.D. Entry was made part of the record as document, marked as "X". During the course of investigation, Sri Neog visited the Place of Occurrence (in short PO), conducted inquest on the dead body, and sent the same to hospital for post mortem examination. In the meantime, Smti. Niru Dihingia, wife of the deceased Trailukya Dihingia of Matia Khana Gaon also lodged an FIR alleging that aforesaid accused person had killed her husband.

6. On the basis of said FIR, O/C, Bordubi P.S., registered a case vide Bordubi P.S. Case No. 124/2009, u/s. 302 IPC. As the investigation progressed from stage to stage, police arrested the accused person, examined the witnesses, did other thing needful and on the conclusion of investigation, he submitted charge sheet u/s. 302 IPC against the accused person and forwarded her to the Court to stand her trial.

7. The learned Magistrate before whom charge sheet was so laid committed the case to the Court of Session since the offence u/s. 302 IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Session. On receipt of the case on commitment learned Sessions Judge on hearing the learned counsel for the parties was pleased to frame charge u/s. 302 IPC and charge, so framed, on being read over and explained to the accused person, she pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried.

8. During trial, prosecution has examined as many as 8(eight) witnesses including the IO of the case, Medical Officer (in short, the MO) who conducted autopsy on the dead body. The statement of the accused person u/s. 313 Cr.P.C. was also recorded. Accused plea was of total denial. In her statement recorded u/s. 313 Cr.P.C., the accused claims that on the night in question, she went to Bordubi P.S. to report that a dead body of an unknown person was found in the veranda of her house and as such, she requested the police to take necessary action in that regard.

9. However, instead of taking action against the culprit, police took her into custody and initiated a case against her. The accused, however, on being required declined to adduce any evidence in her defence.