1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 10.1.2012, passed by learned Sessions Judge (FTC), Cachar, Silchar in Session Case No. 17 of 2010 convicting one Anoi Mia of offence under section 302/309, IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000, in default, to suffer R.I. for another 6 months for the offence under section 302, IPC and also sentencing him to SI for another 6 months under section 309, IPC.

2. Being aggrieved by and dis-satisfied with the judgment aforesaid, the appellant, Anoi Mia ('the accused person'), preferred this appeal from jail alleging several infirmities in the judgment under challenge.

3. We have heard Ms. A. Sarma, learned amicus curiae appearing for the appellant and Ms. S. Jahan, learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State.

4. The case projected by prosecution in the FIR dated 30.5.2001 and in subsequent trial, in short, is that on 20.5.2001 at about 7 pm, accused killed his wife Fulerun Nessa and also his minor son Faruk Hussain by inflicting blows on them with a dao. It is also alleged that after committing the crime, the accused also tried to commit suicide by inflicting cut wounds on his own stomach. An FIR to that effect, on being lodged with O/C, Udharbond Police Station on 03.5.2001 by one Kedar Ali (PW1), police registered a case vide Udharbond P.S. Case No. 90 of 2011 under section 302, IPC and ordered one Sishuram Saikia, SI of Police to investigate the case.

5. Being so entrusted, Sri Saikia embarked upon the investigation, visited the place of occurrence, caused an inquest to be done on dead bodies, sent the same to hospital for post mortem examination, arrested the accused person, examined the witnesses, well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case, did other things needful and on conclusion of investigation, he submitted charge-sheet under section 302, IPC against the accused person and forwarded him to the court to face trial.

6. The Magistrate, before whom the charge sheet was so laid, committed the case to the Court of Session since the offence under section 302, IPC is exclusively triable by the court of Session. On receipt of the case on commitment, the learned Sessions Judge, Silchar transferred the case to the file of learned Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Silchar for disposal in accordance with law.

7. On receipt of the case on transfer and on hearing the learned counsel for the parties, learned Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC) framed charge under section 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.

8. During the course of trial, the prosecution had examined as many as 11 witnesses including informant, Medical Officer, who conducted autopsy and the I/O of the case. The statement of the accused person was recorded under section 313, Cr.PC. The plea of the accused was that since he was not in his sense when the incident occurred, he did not know how his wife and his son were killed and how he got injured. He, however, on being required, declined to adduce any evidence in support of his plea of innocence.

9. On conclusion of trial and on hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the court below was pleased to convict the accused of offence under section 302, IPC and sentenced him to punishment as aforesaid.

10. Ms. A. Sarma, learned amicus curiae for the appellant submits that the judgment in question cannot be sustained since there is no evidence on record to show that on the fateful evening, the accused had killed his wife and his minor son and after having killed them, he tried to commit suicide by inflicting cut wounds on his stomach.

11. Rather there is evidence on record in the form of testimony of PW8 to show that when he approached the house of the accused person on hearing the hue and cry there-from, he found some persons running away from the side of the house of the accused person and when confro