JUDGMENT :

Suman Shyam, J

1. Heard Mr. A. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the appellants. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned senior counsel and APP, Assam, assisted by Mr. J. Das, learned counsel appearing for the State. None has appeared for the informant.

2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 11/02/2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta, in connection with Sessions Case No. 75/2011, convicting the 3 (three) appellants under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay fine with default stipulation.

3. The prosecution case, in a nutshell, is to the effect that the victim Hafija Khatun was married to the accused Karimul Islam about 3 (three) years before the incident. After their marriage, the accused persons used to torture Hafija on demand of dowry. Since such dowry demand was not fulfilled by the parents of the victim, the accused persons had killed victim Hafija. On 27/08/2009 at around 3 a.m. one of the accused, viz. Arman Ali came to the house of the informant and informed that the daughter of Hafija Khatun i.e. Kohinoor was suffering from some serious illness. Then the father of Hafija and her mother rushed to the house of the accused persons and found that Hafija was lying dead on the road but their grand children Kohinoor was not suffering from any ailment.

4. On 28/09/2009, the uncle of the victim, viz. Md. Saiful Islam Bhuyan had lodged an ejahar before the in-charge of the Kalgachia Police Outpost informing the Police about the incident. In the ejahar dated 28/09/2009, 7(seven) persons including the present appellants had been named as the accused persons. On the basis of the ejahar dated 28/09/2009, Sarbhog PS case No. 169/2009 was registered under Sections 498(A)/304(B)/34 IPC. The matter was then taken up for investigation. On completion of investigation, Police had submitted charge sheet under Section 498(A)/304(B) IPC against the following seven accused persons :

i) Karimul Islam,

ii) Nur Hussain,

iii) Osman Gani @ Ali,

iv) Sorman Ali,

v) Kamela Khatun,

vi) Noim Uddin and

vii) Arman Ali.

5. Be it mention herein that the accused no.1 Karimul Islam is the husband of the victim whereas the accused No. 6 Noim Uddin and accused No. 5 Kamela Khatun are the father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively of the victim.

6. Based on the charge sheet submitted by the Police, charges were framed against the accused persons under Sections 498(A)/304(B)/302 of the IPC and the same were read over and explained to the accused persons. However, since the accused persons had pleaded innocence ad claimed to be tried, hence, the matter went up for trial.

7. The prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. During trial, the prosecution side had examined as many as 14 witnesses. Thereafter, the statements of the accused persons were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein, they had denied all the incriminating circumstances put to them. However, the defence side did not adduce any evidence.

8. On conclusion of trial and after considering the materials available on record, the learned trial Court had acquitted 4(four) accused persons, viz. Osman Ali, Nur Hussain, Arman Ali and Sorman Ali in respect of all the charges by holding that the prosecution had failed to prove the charges brought against these accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. In so far as the accused/appellant Karimul Islam, Noim Uddin and Kamela Khatun are concerned, they were also acquitted by the learned trial Court in respect of the charges framed under Section 498(A)/304(B) of the IPC on the ground that those charges could not be established by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. However, these three appellants/accused persons, were convicted under Section 302 of IPC for committing the murder of deceased Hafija Khatun and sentenced as aforesaid. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeal has been filed.

9. Mr. Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellants has