IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Manash Ranjan Pathak, Sanjay Kumar Medhi, JJ.
Rajen Ngatey – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
Criminal Appeal (J) No. 16 of 2017
Decided On : 29-08-2019
Indian Penal Code - Conviction under Section 302 - [MURDER] - [Section 302 IPC] - The court found the accused guilty of murder under Section 302 IPC based on consistent eyewitness testimonies, medical evidence, and weapon seizure. The court also awarded compensation to the victim's widow under Section 357(A) of the Cr.P.C.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for murdering the victim by cutting his jugular vein with a sharp weapon. Eyewitnesses and medical evidence supported the prosecution's case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of the murder based on consistent eyewitness testimonies, medical evidence, and weapon seizure. The court also awarded compensation to the victim's widow under Section 357(A) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues: The main issue was the guilt of the accused in the murder of the victim.
Ratio Decidendi: The consistent eyewitness testimonies, medical evidence, and weapon seizure established the guilt of the accused in the murder.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the court awarded compensation to the victim's widow under Section 357(A) of the Cr.P.C.
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J.
1. This appeal, which is preferred from Jail, is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.01.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat in Sessions Case No. 60 (JM) of 2012. By the impugned judgment, the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) in default of payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for another 3 (three) months.
2. A brief narration of the facts of the case is given herein-below:-
3. The investigation was completed and Charge-sheet submitted. Since the offence under Section 302 IPC is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned SDJM, Majuli vide order dated 01.06.2012 had committed the case to the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat.
4. The prosecution examined 13 Nos. of PWs including the informant as PW-7, whereafter the accused person was also examined under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.
5. After considering the materials on record, the learned Sessions Judge, Jorhat has passed the impugned judgment of conviction.
6. We have heard Mr. T.R. Sarma, learned counsel appearing as Amicus-Curiae. We have also heard Ms. S. Jahan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam and Mr. J. Payeng learned counsel has appeared with the leave of this Court for the informant and he assisted the learned Additional Public Prosecutor.
7. Mr. Sarma, learned Amicus-Curiae, has submitted that the impugned judgment is not sustainable in as much as the materials before the Court were not sufficient to come to the conclusion that the accused appellant was guilty of the offences alleged against him. It is submitted that there are inherent inconsistencies in the depositions and in view of the same, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence could not have been passed.
8. To appreciate the submissions, let us examine the materials before us including the depositions, Seizure List, PM report and FSL report. We have carefully perused the other materials on record which were called for.
9. PW-1 Sri Ajit Ngatey is the nephew of the deceased Sadaram Ngatey. He deposes that on the fateful day he was working inside the house when one Smt. Dumuni Gum from another village had come to his village raising hue and cry and informed that the accused appellant had cut Sadaram on the road in front of the house of the appellant. Hearing the same, PW-1 claimed to have rushed to the place of occurrence and found his uncle with cut injury on his neck. The body was found in front of the house of the accused appellant. The matter was informed to the police and he had noticed that the accused appellant with all other members of the house had fled away. PW-1 claimed to have met Smt. Dumuni Gum, who had informed him that she had witnessed the incident. The same information was also given by one Sri Nipen Payeng as well as Dipak Ngatey and that the accused appellant had also tried to inflict injuries upon them. The night was said to be moonlit night, however, with some clouds and PW-1 is one of the signatories in the Inquest Report. The said PW-1 was cross-examined in which he had admitted that he was also detained in the police station and confined for some time.
10. PW-2 Sri Nilomoni Noroh is the VDP Secretary o
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.