The benefit of doubt must go in favor of the accused when the prosecution fails to establish the charge beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT

Suman Shyam, J. - Heard Mr. N. K. Barua, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. M. Phukan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State. None has appeared for the informant/ respondent No.2.

2. This appeal from Jail is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.04.2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh, in Sessions Case No.22/2016 convicting the appellant under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for committing murder of his wife Lakhi Dhan and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs.500/- with default clause.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the accused/appellant Balu Dhan had murdered his wife Lakhi Dhan and buried the dead body in the premises of his house under the old latrine. Since 12.11.2015 Lakhi Dhan was missing. After a frenetic search and on the basis of extra-judicial confession made by the appellant the dead body of the victim was eventually dug out by the police from place where it was buried.

4. On 15.11.2015, an ejahar was lodged with the Officer-in-charge of Tengakhat Police Station by Sri Bogapani Dhan (PW-1) reporting the incident to the police with a request to arrest the accused and investigate the matter. Based on the said ejahar, Tengakhat Police Station Case No.65/15 was registered under Section 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code. The responsibility for carrying out investigation in the police case was entrusted upon S.I. Numal Borah. During the course of investigation the Investigating Officer (I.O.) had conducted inquest on the body and the dead body Page was also forwarded for autopsy examination. The I.O. had prepared a sketch map of the place of occurrence, recorded the statements of the witnesses and thereafter, submitted charge-sheet against the accused under Section 302/201 of the IPC. Based on the charge-sheet submitted by the I.O. charge was framed against the appellant under section 302/201 IPC which was read over and explained to the accused but since the accused had pleaded not guilty, the matter was sent up for trial.

5. By the impugned judgment and order dated 24.04.2019, the learned Sessions Judge had convicted the appellant primarily by taking note of the extra-judicial confession made by the appellant admitting to the fact that he had killed his wife and also pointing out the place where the dead body was buried. The learned Sessions Judge was also of the view that the accused was last seen together with his wife i.e. the deceased immediately before her disappearance and therefore, the conviction was also partly based on "last seen together" theory which was held to be proved by the prosecution.

6. In order to establish the charge brought against the accused the prosecution side had examined as many as 11 witnesses. However, the defence side did not adduce any evidence.

7. Pw-1 Bogapani Dhan is the informant in this case and in his deposition, the witness had stated that he knew the accused Balu Dhan. The house of the accused is situated in front of his house and there is a road between their houses. According to PW-1, deceased Lakhi Dhan is the wife of the accused. The incident took place during the Kali Puja of 2015 on which date, Kali Puja was celebrated in front of the house of Balu Dhan but his wife Lakhi Dhan was not seen in the Puja Mandap. On the next day also they did not see Lakhi Dhan. On the 3rd day one Bishal Oriya (PW-9) had asked the appellant Balu Dhan about his wife and then he had stated before Bishal that he had murdered his wife Lakhi Dhan and buried her in the old latrine of his house. Later on, Bishal had told the PW-1 about the death of Lakhi Dhan and also informed the Gaonburah Buleswar Konwar (PW-2) and one member of "Asha Karmi" Sri Shyamal Saluk (PW-4). Then the Gaonburah and the Asha Karmi, accompanied by several villagers, went to the house of Balu Dhan and asked about his wife when the accused Balu had showed the latrine of his house wh