The Criminal Appeal (J) No. 14/2015, Criminal Appeal (J) No. 20/2015 and Criminal Appeal (J) No. 38/2015, have been preferred respectively by accused appellant, Muslim Ali, Alam Alil and Pacha Ali, against the judgment and order, dated 15.12.2015, in Session Case No. 83/2012, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Morigaon, convicting and sentencing each of them to pay a fine of Rs 500 under Section 341 Indian Penal Code (IPC) and rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for offence under Section 304 IPC and fine of Rs 5000, in default to undergo imprisonment for six months.

2. The fact preceding these appeals are as follows:

3. On 31.10.2010 an FIR was lodged by Ms. Roonjoon Das alleging that accused Pacha Ali, the appellant in Criminal Appeal 38/2015, accused Alam Ali, the appellant in Criminal Appeal 20/2015 along with accused Muslim Ali, the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 14/2015 and Jaila Ali (since absconding) restrained and assaulted Atul Devnath, the deceased, and as a result of the injuries sustained, he died.

4. On receipt of the FIR a case under Section 341/302/34 of IPC was registered as Jagiroad P.S Case No. 249/2010 and after completion of the investigation a chargesheet was laid against accused Pacha Ali, Alam Ali, Muslim Ali and Jaila Ali for offences under Section 341/302/34 of IPC.

5. The offences being triable exclusively by the Court of Session, the case was committed to the Court of Session at Morigaon. After hearing both sides charges under Section 341/302/34 of IPC were framed against all the chargesheeted accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. During the trial of the case, the accused Jaila @ Jalil Ali absconded and, accordingly, he was declared an absconder.

6. The trial proceeded against four accused namely, Pacha Ali, Alam Ali and Muslim Ali. Prosecution examined ten (10) witnesses including the Medical Officer and the Investigating Police Officers. At the closure of prosecution evidence, as required under Section 313 of CrPC, all the incriminating materials were put to the accused persons. The accused persons denied the accusation levelled against them and also declined to adduce any evidence. After hearing arguments tendered by the Prosecution as well as the defence, the learned Sessions Judge, Morigaon, convicted and sentenced the accused appellants as aforesaid.

7. All the three Criminal Appeals are taken up together for common hearing for disposal by this common judgment as the appeals are from a common judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Morigaon.

8. I have examined the trial Court’s record including the evidence laid by the prosecution as well as the judgment put to challenge in these appeals.

9. Heard the learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. N.J. Das (Criminal Appeal (J) 14/2015), Amicus Curiae Mr. S. Borthakur (Criminal Appeal (J) 20/2015) and learned counsel, Mr. J.I. Borbhuiyan (Criminal Appeal (J) 38/2015), appearing for the respective appellants and also the learned Public Prosecutor, Mr. PP Baruah, for the State.

10. On a reading of the impugned judgment it appears that the learned trial Court has found this case to be based on circumstantial as well as direct evidence. The learned trial Court has placed reliance on the testimonies of pw 2, Ms. Roonjoon Das, Pw 4, Ms. Usha Bordoloi, Pw 5 Ms. Usha Adhikari, PW 6, Mr. Naru Dey and pw 8, Mr. Mafidul Islam.

11. For the sake of convenient appreciation, the evidence tendered by some of the material witnesses are being reproduced hereinbelow ;

12. Pw 2, Roonjoon Das, the informant, deposed that the deceased was residing, as tenant, in her house. On the day of occurrence she was informed by a little boy that the deceased was having a quarrel with some persons. When she reached the spot she found the deceased Atul Devnath with two boys. She called Atul to her house and while Atul followed her, the accused persons, armed with lathi, chased Atul, the deceased, but was intervened by Ward Member Usharani. According to pw 2