IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Sandeep Mehta, Susmita Phukan Khaund, JJ.
Somna Boro @ Chamna Narzary, Son of Dharam Narzary - Appellant
Versus
The State of Assam, represented by Public Prosecutor and ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.191 of 2019
Decided On : 15-09-2023
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 341/ 326/302 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374(2), 437-A, 391 – Appeal – Offence of Murder - Whether their version is reliable so as to believe the theory of oral dying declaration – Held, approach of the trial Court cannot be appreciated - There is nothing on record which could have satisfied trial Court that the summons was actually served to the Doctor - Evidence of Medical Jurist being a witness of vital import should not have been closed in such a casual manner - Prosecution should have been more vigilant and proper effort should have been made to serve summons to Doctor by hand through of the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station concerned - If the witness did not appear despite service of summons, coercive measures should have been sought for - Court could have exercised jurisdiction under Section 391 Cr.PC and Doctor could have been summoned for giving evidence even at appellate stage, but in view of preceding findings, wherein have discarded prosecution theory regarding oral dying declaration made by deceased, which is only palpable evidence relied upon by the prosecution so as to bring home charges against accused, this Court is not inclined to exercise powers under Section 391 Cr.PC so as to summon and examine the doctor at this stage as it would be nothing short of an exercise in futility - Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
The appellant herein, namely, Somna Boro @ Chamna Narzary, has preferred the instant appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.PC for assailing the judgment dated 25.01.2019 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar in Sessions Case No.112/2018, whereby he was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 341/ 326/302 IPC and sentenced as below:-
2. Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the appeal are noted herein below.
On 29.08.2013, one Rajendra Basumatary (PW- 1) lodged a written report (Exhibit-1) with the Officer-in- Charge of Kachugaon Police Station alleging inter alia that on the previous day, i.e. on 28.08.2013 at around 6:30 PM, while his father Bimal Basumatary was coming from Hell Bridge Bazaar on his bicycle, suddenly he was attacked by the accused/appellant, namely, Somna Boro, somewhere on the way to Dudua Gate near Gongia river. According to Bimal Basumatary, the accused/appellant was trying to finish him at the spot but somehow he managed to escape from the hands of the accused/ appellant.
Immediately thereafter, Bimal Basumatary (father of the informant) was admitted to Kachugaon Block Primary Health Care. As the condition of his father was very serious, the Doctor advised that the injured should be provided with a better medical attention.
On the basis of this written report, a formal FIR No.37/2013 came to be registered at the Kachugaon Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 341/326/307 IPC and investigation was commenced.
3. Shri Bimal Basumatary expired on 29.08.2013 while undergoing treatment at MJN Medical Hospital, Cooch Behar, upon which the dead body was subjected to autopsy by the Medical Officer of the said Hospital, namely, Dr. Subrata Haldar, who prepared the post mortem report (Exhibit-2), taking note of the following injuries:-
(ii) Surgical stitches with silk were noted at forehead. On dissection, one sharp cut injury was noted admeasuring 10 Cm in length and was bone deep.
(iii) Surgical stitches at parietal region. On dissection, one sharp cut injury was noted admeasuring 15 CM long upto bone deep. On dissection, clotted of blood into brain tissue was found.
The cause of death as per the findings in the post mortem report was shock and hemorrhage because of the injuries which were opined to be homicidal and sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death.
4. After the death of Shri Bimal Basumatary, offence punishable under Section 302 IPC was added to the case. Statements of various witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.PC. The accused/appellant absconded and thus, proceedings of proclamation and attachment were taken against him. Charge-sheet was filed against the accused/appellant in his abscondence. The accused/appellant surrendered in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Gossaigaon on 08.06.2016, on which the case was committed to the Court of Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar. Charges were framed against the accused/appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 341/326 and 302 IPC. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial
Murder – Non-examination of Doctor who conducted autopsy on dead body of deceased and who prepared post-mortem report is not fatal to case of prosecution.
The court relied on oral and documentary evidence to establish the guilt of the accused under Section 302 IPC.
A dying declaration must be trustworthy and corroborated; significant discrepancies in the statement led to acquittal due to reasonable doubt not established by prosecution.
A dying declaration can serve as the sole basis for conviction if it is credible and corroborated, emphasizing its legal admissibility in murder cases.
The need for circumstances to be fully established and consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, and the requirement for corroboration of an oral dying declaration by other ind....
The prosecution's case must be established beyond reasonable doubt, especially when relying on dying declarations, which must be corroborated and trustworthy.
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.