IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
AJIT SINGH, N. CHAUDHURY, JJ.
Sri Rajib Dutta S/o Late Babula Nath Dutta - Appellant
Versus
The State of Assam - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 359 of 2013
Decided On : 26-08-2016
Indian Penal Code - Section 302 – Criminal Procedure Code - Section 162, 161 - Evidence Act - Section 27 - Arms Act, 1959 - Section 25(1)(B) and 27 – Offence of Murder - Examination of witnesses by police - Statements to police not to be signed: Use of statements in evidence - Three persons including the present appellant were charged under the aforesaid sections of law in the same Sessions case but the other two were discharged by the High Court in a revision petition preferred by them and thus only the appellant herein was tried as sole accused person and ultimately he has been found guilty of all the charges - Prosecution story is that one as informant, lodged an FIR with Officer In-charge, Jorhat Police Station - Informing that at around 4.30 P.M. of the previous day, her husband Pinku Bora went out to Club on being invited by accused for holding a discussion in connection with their ongoing business. She claimed to have been informed by her husband that had invited him over telephone to meet at him in Club between 8 P.M. to 8.30 P.M. to have a discussion with him and he made an entry in his diary to that effect - First went to Bus Terminus for supervising his contract work - He informed his wife while going out that he would visit Club at around 9 P.M. to honour the invitation - But at around 1 O’clock at night, police came from Police Station to inform that someone had killed her husband in front of Rajabari Club. She missed no time to go to the place of occurrence and found her husband lying dead and came to know had fled from the place of occurrence after killing her husband. She subsequently heard that other members of the Club including one Thanking Lama were present at the time of occurrence – Held, Course of discussions on business issues, the deceased might have sought to kill the accused by the revolver apparently in his possession. In such a situation, the accused must have snatched the revolver from the hand of the deceased and shot at him. Such a view being possible one and since such view is in favour of the accused, we feel inclined to adopt this view. There is no material on record to hold that the accused had any previous plan to commit the murder of the deceased. Rather, it is probable that he became a victim of circumstances pursuant to a sudden quarrel with the deceased. For these reasons, we set aside the conviction and sentence of appellant under section 302 of the IPC and instead convict him under section 304 Part-I of the IPC and sentence him to Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years. The sentence of fine is, however, affirmed. The Exbt. A Webley revolver did not belong to the accused and hence even temporary possession or user thereof by him attracts the provision of section 25(1B) and section 27(1) of the Arms Act, 1959. The conviction and sentence under these two sections, therefore, also cannot be interfered with - Appeal stands partly allowed
N. Chaudhury, J.
Appellant herein has challenged his conviction and sentence under Section 302 of the IPC read with Section 25(1)(B) and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 vide judgment and order dated 15.11.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat in Sessions Case No. 25(JJ) of 2006. Three persons including the present appellant were charged under the aforesaid sections of law in the same Sessions case but the other two were discharged by the High Court in a revision petition preferred by them and thus only the appellant herein was tried as sole accused person and ultimately he has been found guilty of all the charges.
2. The prosecution story is that one Smti. Sunita Bora, as informant, lodged an FIR with Officer In-charge, Jorhat Police Station on 29.11.2003 at 5 P.M. informing that at around 4.30 P.M. of the previous day, her husband Pinku Bora went out to Rajabari Club, Jorhat on being invited by accused Rajib Dutta for holding a discussion in connection with their ongoing business. She claimed to have been informed by her husband that, Rajib Dutta had invited him over telephone to meet at him in Club between 8 P.M. to 8.30 P.M. to have a discussion with him and he made an entry in his diary to that effect. Pinku Bora first went to Jorhat Bus Terminus at 4.30 P.M. for supervising his contract work. He informed his wife while going out that he would visit Rajabari Club at around 9 P.M. to honour the invitation of Rajib Dutta. But at around 1 O’clock at night, police came from Jorhat Police Station to inform that someone had killed her husband in front of Rajabari Club. She missed no time to go to the place of occurrence and found her husband lying dead and came to know that Rajib Dutta had fled from the place of occurrence after killing her husband. She subsequently heard that other members of the Club including one Thanking Lama were present at the time of occurrence. She saw a red jeep (ASJ-8012) belonging to Thanking Lama in front of Rajabari Club. She believed that Rajib Dutta in collusion with others killed her husband for business rivalry. However, she also informed that one Mukti Deka, a SULFA man had enmity with her husband and his involvement was likely because of business issues. On the basis of this ejahar Jorhat P.S. Case No. 443/2003 under sections 302/34 of the IPC was registered. However, it is to be mentioned that before receipt of this ejahar, Jorhat Police had already registered General Diary Entry No. 1117 dated 28.11.2003 at 11.15 P.M. on the basis of a telephonic information given by I. Ali, Sub Inspector of Police who was on duty along with B.S.F men near Lahoti petrol pump that there was a firing incident at Rajabari Club. Upon registration of the general diary entry, night mobile vehicles No. 1 and 2 were directed to visit the place of occurrence. Mr. M. Ahmed, the Officer In-charge of the police station himself visited the place of occurrence along with the staff.
3. Police broke open the lock of the Club and found marks of violence, pool of blood, three fired bullets etc. inside the Club room. The dead body was found near the railway crossing in front of the Club. Police took the dead body to Jorhat Civil Hospital, seized one revolver case with belt, one ammunition case with 13 rounds of ammunitions, one registration certificate of Gypsy vehicle bearing registration No. AS-03A/6955, one gold like chain, one pencil torch black in colour and one rainbow notebook. The aforesaid Gypsy was also seized. Police recorded statements of witnesses. Accused Rajib Dutta was arrested on 30.11.2013 who led police to the place to the west of the Rajabari Club wherefrom one Webley revolver having serial No. 35235 was recovered from under bush in presence of one Sandeep Roy and one Shankar Roy. In course of post mortem examination of the dead body one pellet was found in the dead body of the deceased and the same along with blood-stained wearing apparels were seized by police on being handed over by Dr. A
Anter Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan
H.N. Rishbud and another Vs. the State of Delhi
Inspector of Police, Tamil Nadu Vs. Bala Prasanna
Iswar Singh Vs. the State of U.P.
Kartarey and others Vs. the State of U.P.
Kora Ghasi Vs. State of Orissa
Nachhattar Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab
Nilesh Dinkar Paradkar Vs. State of Maharastra
Mohmed Inayatulaah Vs. The State of Maharastra
Mustkeem alias Sirajuddin Vs. State of Rajasthan
Pulukuri Kottaya and others Vs. Emperor
Rammi @ Rameshwar Vs. State of M.P.
Raghunandan Vs. The State of U.P.
Sarwan Singh Ratan Singh Vs. State of Punjab
Sk. Yusuf Vs. State of West Bengal
State of Gujarat Vs. Adam Fateh Mohmed Umatiya and others
Udai Bhan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.