The need for compelling reasons to interfere with an order of acquittal.

JUDGMENT

M.A. Ali, J. - This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.09.2013, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur, in Sessions Case No.1(NL)/2007, whereby, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondents No. 1 to 3 of the charge under Section 302/109 IPC and Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act.

2. As per the prosecution case, the victim Tanya Mosing came out from his house at Itanagar with his vehicle on 10.02.2001 at about 5 PM and he did not return home. On the next day, he was found lying dead at Pathalipahar, Banderdewa. Having come to know about killing of the victim Tanya Mosing, the FIR (Ext.13) was lodged by PW-15, Sri Ugen Pulsar, on the basis of which, police registered Bihpuria P.S. Case No. 45/2001 under Section 302 IPC. IN course of investigation, police recorded statement of the witnesses, seized certain incriminating articles as well as the revolver and the vehicle of the deceased, prepared inquest report and the dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. Dr. Hridayananda Baruah (PW-6) conducted the post-mortem examination, who found the following injuries.

"Multiple sharp and deed cut injuries (8 and 19 nos exact nos. Could not be elicited due to distorted anatomy of the muscles by multiple cuts) seen on right side of the neck extending from occipital region to lower portion of neck.

An oblique sharp and deep cut injury was seen in the lower portion of occipital bone on right side. The bone was cut with exposure of brain matter.

An oblique sharp cut injury seen over the mandible on right side with the mandible cut into two pieces.

A penetrating injury by a dagger (khukri) in the chest.

Blood stains was present over the head, neck and shoulders.

One sharp and deep cut injury over the occipital bone on right side (7x4x3 cm).

Membrane cut and brain matter exposed in the occipital region (right side).

In the opinion of the doctor, death was caused to due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries sustained by the victim and all the injuries were antemortem and was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.

3. On completion of the investigation charge sheet was laid against the respondents No. 1 to 3, who eventually stood trial.

4. In course of trial, learned Sessions Judge framed charges against the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 under Section 302/109 IPC and Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act R/W Section 34 IPC, to which all the respondents pleaded not guilty. Fifteen witnesses were examined by the prosecution in order to bring home the charges and on appreciation of the evidence, learned Sessions judge acquitted all the accused/respondent Nos.1 to 3.

5. Aggrieved, the wife of the victim has preferred the instant appeal.

6. We have heard the learned Sr. Counsel, Mr. P.K. Tiwari for the appellant and the learned Addl. P.P., Ms. S. Jahan for the respondent No. 4 as well as learned counsel Ms. S.G. Baruah for the respondents No. 1 to 3. We have also scrutinized the evidence brought on record.

7. The first witness examined by the prosecution was one Bipul Bhuyan, who testified that one morning, he found the dead body of a person lying in a pit near Pathalipahar Railway crossing and immediately he informed the officer-in-charge of Banderdewa Out Post. He also stated to have noticed a Gypsy vehicle near the body. He further stated that he had seen cut injury on the neck of the deceased and one 'khukri' was found inserted into his neck.

8. The second witness examined by the prosecution was one Robin Bhuyan, who stated, that having learnt about the occurrence, he came to the place of occurrence along with other people and had seen the body with injury. He also stated to have signed the seizure list (Ext.2), whereby personal belongings of the deceased including one pistol was seized by police.

9. The third witness examined by the prosecution was PW-3, Smt. Paye Mosing, who is the wife of the deceased. The PW-3 testified that on 10.02.2001, her husband (victim) t