SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Ajit Singh, Suman Shyam, JJ.
Sri Anil Medhi & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Assam - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (J) No. 96 of 2012
Decided On : 27-07-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. P.J. Phukan
For the Respondent: Ms. S. Jahan

Headnote:

Indian penal Code,1860 - Sections 302/34, 109 and 147 – Appeal against convicted – Offence of murder - Appellants, have been convicted under section 302/34 of Indian Penal Code for committing murder of and each of them have been sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of with default stipulation - Prosecution case is that on at about aforementioned appellants had engaged in a quarrel with and thereafter, chased and hacked with killing him on spot - Murder took place at instance of their father over a quarrel involving land dispute - Brother of deceased, had lodged an with Police Station, District- Informing Police about incident - Based on said Police Station was registered under Section 302/109/34 of Indian Penal Code and an investigation was started by Police- case is aforementioned three appellants Anil had engaged in a quarrel with and thereafter, chased and hacked with dao killing him on the spot - Murder took place at the instance of their father over a quarrel involving land dispute – Held, Eye witnesses have seen each of appellants chasing and hacking deceased one after other - Since doctor had examined dead body at time of post mortem, hence it is not apparent as to on what basis he had given an opinion that all injuries were inflicted by - Therefore, said opinion of doctor, in light of testimony of eye-witnesses, has to be read and understood as injuries having been caused by - Such an interpretation also fits into to testimony of eye-witnesses, all of whom have seen appellants use an - We have already held that from testimony of four eye-witnesses it is established beyond reasonable doubt that appellants have dealt multiple blows on person of deceased which has resulted into his death - Prosecution case having been established based on clear, cogent and convincing evidence on record, we hold that conviction of all appellants under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and their sentence to life imprisonment was just and proper - Appeal and same stands dismissed

JUDGMENT AND ORDER :

Suman Shyam, J.

The three appellants, viz, Anil Medhi, Nitul Medhi and June Kalita have been convicted under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code for committing murder of Banamali Kalita and each of them have been sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2000/- with default stipulation.

2. The prosecution case is that on 16/06/2003 at about 9-30 a.m., the aforementioned three appellants Anil Medhi, Nitul Medhi and June Kalita had engaged in a quarrel with Banamali and thereafter, chased and hacked Banamali with dao killing him on the spot. The murder took place at the instance of their father Purandhar Kalita and Smt. Renu Kalita over a quarrel involving land dispute.

3. On 16/06/2003 Shri Tutumoni Bora (Kalita) (PW-1) i.e. the brother of the deceased, had lodged an ejahar with the Dhing Police Station, District-Nagaon, informing the Police about the incident. Based on the said ejahar, Dhing Police Station case No. 73/2003 was registered under Section 302/109/34 of the Indian Penal Code and an investigation was started by the Police. On completion of the investigation, charge sheet was submitted against all the three appellants as well as the co-accused Sri Purandhar Kalita and Smt. Renu Kalita under Section 147/302 of the Indian Penal Code. On being committed to the Court of Sessions Judge, Nagaon, Sessions case No. 263/2003 was registered and thereafter formal charges were framed against all the five accused persons under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused persons having pleaded not guilty, the matter was put to trial, where after, the appellants here-in had been convicted under section 302/34 of the IPC for committing murder of Banamali Kalita. The remaining two accused, viz. Sri Purandhar Kalita and Smt. Renu Kalita were, however, acquitted due to lack of evidence against them.

4. Evidence on record reveals that Jonti @ Banamali Bora (Kalita), a male aged about 30 years, had died on 16/06/2003 after having suffered multiple cut injuries on his body with sharp weapon. The inquest report Ext. 3 indicates that there were marks of cut with sharp weapon on the back and on the dorsal side of the right arm and when the body was turned over and examined, a large injury caused by cutting with sharp weapon was also seen on the chest. The inquest report further mentions that there was a quarrel and resultant fight amongst the father and the brothers of the deceased over the family affairs and landed properties in course of which, the deceased was cut to death with dao.

5. Post mortem examination was conducted on the dead body on 16/06/2003 at the B.P. Civil Hospital, Nagaon. As per the Post Mortem Report (Ext-7), the following injuries were found on the dead body.

"1. Oblique incised wound 6"x2"x bone deep on the left parietal and temporal region of the scalp.

2. Oblique incised wound extending from post wall of the right axilla up to 1½" below the left nipple with multiple fracture of rib (cut) on both side of extensive chest wall exposing thoracic visceras on the right side of the chest. Length of the wound about 18"x1"x2".

3. Incised wound on the left deltoid region, measuring 3"x1".

4. Transverse incised wound on the left scapula region measuring 4"x1"x1".

5. Transverse incised wound on the right lumber region measuring 2"x1"x1".

6. Oblique incised would on the left forearm post aspect left forearm 3" below tip of left elbow."

6. Dr. Keshaba Nanda Goswami, who had conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Banamali, was examined as PW-6. The doctor had opined that the death of the deceased was caused due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the injuries sustained. The doctor has further deposed that the injuries were ante mortem and homicidal in nature and was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.

7. The prosecution case is based on the testimony of as many as four eye witnesses to the incident. Shri Uttam Bezbaruah (PW-3), who is a neighbour of the appell


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top