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

2017 Supreme(Gau) 1277

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Ajit Singh, Manojit Bhuyan, JJ.
Suraj Ali – Appellant
Vs.
State of Assam – Respondent
Crl. Appeal No. 189 of 2014
Decided On : 06-01-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :B.M. Choudhury and U. Choudhury, Advocates
For the Respondents:K. Konwar, Advocate

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code - Sections 302/201/34 – Criminal Procedure Code - Section 313 – Evidence – Murder – Injury - Appellants were also heard on point of sentence - Trial Court convicted appellants on charges framed and proved against them and while doing so took into consideration eye-witness accounts who is wife of elder brother of deceased – Held, Case at hand is entirely different from case in Pal meeting of mind of appellants is overwhelmingly present in present case - Their target was Manu Ali and they achieved same by taking recourse to a criminal act - Case of therefore is not at all applicable in facts and circumstances of present case - Apex Court reached just conclusion - Evidently did not share common intention with Pal in criminal act against existence or otherwise of common intention depends upon facts and circumstances of each case - A prior meeting of minds of accused is essence – Appeal dismissed

JUDGMENT :

Manojit Bhuyan, J.

The 7 (seven) appellants, namely, Md. Saifuddin Ahmed @ Gambhu Sheikh, Md. Abdul Malek, Md. Jambu Sheikh, Md. Matlib Ali @ Matlebuddin, all sons of Late Majibur Rahman, along with Md. Akalu Sheikh @ Ainal Hoque, Md. Gulu Sheikh @ Golap Hussain, both sons of Md. Suruj Ali and Md. Suruj Ali himself has been convicted under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine and default stipulations. No separate sentence was imposed for their conviction under Section 201. During the present appeal proceedings, Md. Suruj Ali suffered demise.

2. The victim of the incident was Manu Ali, aged about 35 years.

3. The case of the prosecution is that around 10 P.M. of 06.09.2003 when the deceased Manu Ali had come home from Shillong, the appellants above-named along with another co-accused Majibur Rahman chased him from outside into the house and assaulted him with sharp weapons and then dragged him out of the house. Manu Ali died instantly and his dead body was thrown into the nearby jute field.

4. Jayanti Das @ Jaynab Begum (PW-1) and Muklesa Begum (PW-2), who are the wife and daughter of Manu Ali respectively, rushed to Dalgaon Police Station and gave oral information to the Police, whereupon G.D. Entry No. 136 dated 06.09.2003 was recorded in the Police Diary at 11.50 P.M. Formal F.I.R. was lodged by the said PW-1 on 07.09.2003 at 9 A.M. before the Dalgaon Police Station. In both the G.D. Entry dated 06.09.2003 and F.I.R. dated 07.09.2003 the names of all the appellants including one Majibur Rahman were mentioned. Dalgaon P.S. Case No. 231/2003 was registered against the above accused persons under Sections 448/302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Alok Kumar Goswami (PW-8), who was entrusted to investigate into the case, visited the place of occurrence, prepared the inquest, recorded the statement of witnesses and sent the deceased to Mangaldai Civil Hospital for post mortem examination. As per the Seizure List (Ext.-2), one 7 feet long blood-stained iron spear with a wooden handle and a bamboo lathi about 2 ft. long were seized from the house of one Mahammad Ali, on being shown by Muklesa Begum (PW-2). Upon completion of investigation, Charge Sheet was submitted against all the accused persons for offence punishable under Sections 448/302/201/34 IPC and the case was committed to trial. Formal charge was laid under Section 302/34 IPC and Sections 201/34 IPC. During the trial proceedings, however, one of the co-accused i.e. Majibur Rahman suffered demise.

5. To bring home the guilt of the appellants for causing the death of Manu Ali, the prosecution examined as many as 8 (eight) witnesses, including the Medical Officer and the Investigating Officer. Each of the appellants were also examined under Section 313 CrPC. The defence examined 2 (two) witnesses, namely, Md. Muktar Hussain (DW-1), who is the village Gaonburha and Muzafar Ali (DW-2), who is a resident of the village in question. One Dayaram Saikia, Officer In-charge of Dalgaon Police Station also deposed as CW-1 to substantiate that Exhibit-9 is the original G.D. Entry No. 136 dated 06.09.2003 and that in the said G.D. Entry the name of Suraj Ali had been clearly written without any overwriting or correction. The appellants were also heard on the point of sentence. The trial Court convicted the appellants on the charges framed and proved against them and while doing so took into consideration the eye-witness accounts of Jayanti Das (PW-1), Muklesa Begum (PW-2) and Mahmuda Begum (PW-4), who is the wife of the elder brother of the deceased Manu Ali.

6. Jayanti Das (PW-1) deposed that on the date of occurrence, her husband Manu Ali had come from Shillong and before he reached home all the accused persons started chasing him and as he entered the house the said accused also entered by breaking open the door and after taking Manu Ali out of the house to the backside of the house they assaulted him. On t

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top