JUDGMENT :

Hitesh Kumar Sarma, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order, dated 21.11.2016, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur, in Sessions Case No. 59(NL)/2015, convicting the accused-appellant for commission of offence under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment for 6 (six) months.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the accused-appellant, Mr. D. Talukdar and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state respondent, Ms. B. Bhuyan.

3. We have also examined the trial court records containing the evidence of the prosecution witnesses as well as the impugned judgment.

4. The prosecution case, as unfolded during the trial is that, at about 1:30 pm on 22.02.2015 when the deceased (Gunabati Chutia), was sitting in the house of PWs 4 & 6, the accused-appellant came there and inflicted injury with a 'Khante' dao on the back of the neck of the deceased causing instant death of the deceased and then fled away from the place of occurrence. The place of occurrence is the house of PW 6 and PW 4.

5. On such facts, the PW 1, Dilip Chutia, i.e., husband of the deceased, lodged the FIR with the Dhakuakhana Police Station, which registered a case being Dhakuakhana PS Case No. 21/2015, under Sections 302/34 IPC, investigated into it, collected evidence, and finally, on completion of investigation, laid charge-sheet against the accused-appellant for offence under Section 302 IPC.

6. After exhausting all required legal formalities, the learned trial court framed a formal charge against the accused-appellant under Section 302 IPC to which he had pleaded innocence, and therefore, the trial commenced.

7. To bring home the charge against the accused-appellant, the prosecution examined as many as 11 (eleven) witnesses, who were, except PW 10, examined in cross by the defence. After closure of the prosecution evidence, statement of the accused-appellant was recorded under Section 313 Cr.PC and in his such statement also he denied the accusations made against him. He also declined to adduce defence evidence. In his such statement, the accused-appellant had taken the plea of denial.

8. For convenience, we would like to first refer to the evidence of PW 10/Autopsy doctor. The PW 10 deposed that on 23.2.2015, he was working as Medical & Health Officer at North Lakhimpur Civil Hospital and on that day he performed the postmortem examination over the dead body of the deceased (Gunabati Chutia) vide Ext. 2. On postmortem examination, he found as follows:

One incised Injury over the middle of back of neck with transaction of spinal cord (size- 4" x 2" x 3").

He also opined that the cause of death of the deceased is due to hemorrhage shock and spinal cord transaction as a result of injury sustained.

9. On perusal of the evidence on record, PWs 4, 8 & 9 are found to be the eyewitnesses to the occurrence. The occurrence took place in the house of PWs 4 & 6 is an undisputed fact. The evidence of PW 4 is that she was with her elder sister of her husband, Gunada Hazarika (PW 9). At the relevant time of occurrence while the accused-appellant came to her house the deceased also reached there. She had seen the accused-appellant cutting the deceased Gunabati Chutia with a 'Khante' dao on her neck. She then, came to the road and raised alarm following which the villagers gathered at the place of occurrence. Thereafter, the deceased was taken to the hospital by a 108 Ambulance.

10. PW 9, corroborating the evidence of PW 4, deposed that at the relevant time of occurrence, the deceased Gunabati Chutia came to her house, and coming out of the house, she found the accused was sitting there. Then, uttering the words "I will cut Gunabati", he inflicted the injury on the neck of the deceased in her presence.

11. PW 8 has also corroborated the evidence of PWs 4 & 9. It is his evidence that while he was sitting