SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Gau) 1428

THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
KALYAN RAI SURANA, MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA, JJ.
Rekhman Ali Barbhuiya @ Md. Rekhman Ali, S/o. Md. Saman Ali and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State Of Assam, Represented By PP Assam And Anr. – Respondents
Crl.A. No.167 Of 2023
Decided On : 13-12-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya.
For the Respondents: Ms. B. Bhuyan.

The prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellants caused the victim's death, leading to their acquittal.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 - Appeal against conviction and sentence - Conviction under Sections 148, 447/149, and 302/149 IPC challenged on grounds of lack of reliable evidence, unexplained delay in lodging FIR, and failure to prove unlawful assembly and direct involvement in the crime. The Court held that the prosecution failed to establish that the appellants were the assailants causing the death of the victim, leading to their acquittal. (Paras 57, 58)

Facts of the case:
The appellants were convicted for offenses stemming from an incident on 15.10.2010, where they allegedly assaulted the victim, leading to his death. The FIR was lodged on 19.10.2010, raising questions about the delay and the circumstances of the victim's treatment.

Findings of Court:
The Court found gaps in the prosecution's case, particularly regarding the treatment of the victim and the reliability of witness testimonies, resulting in a lack of confidence in the evidence presented.

Issues: The main issues included the reliability of witness accounts, the unexplained delay in filing the FIR, and the adequacy of evidence proving the appellants' involvement in the crime.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court ruled that the evidence was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellants were responsible for the victim's death, highlighting the prosecution's failure to provide necessary medical documentation and eyewitness accounts.

Result: Appeals allowed; appellants acquitted.

JUDGMENT :

(K.R. Surana, J.)

Heard Mr. A.M. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam.

2. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order of sentence dated 06.05.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hailakandi in Sessions Case No. 147/2018 the present appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

3. By the impugned judgment, the appellants were convicted of committing offence under Sections 148/447/ 149/302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 6 (six) months. For committing of offence under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code the reference were sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 1 (one) month for committing the offence under Sections 447/149 of the Indian Penal Code, the appellants were convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of 15 (fifteen) years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each with default stipulation for committing the offence under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. In brief, the case of the prosecution is that on 15.10.2010, at about 11:00 AM, the appellants, herein along with Mujibur Rahman and Hannan, by forming an unlawful assemble had entered into the farm house of the complainant and they had inflicted one cut injury on the hand and ear of the care taker, namely, Safiqur Rahman and tried to kill him. It was projected that the matter was reported to the police at Panchgram Police Out Post under Algapur Police Station and the victim was taken to Kalinagar Hospital for treatment with the help of police from where he was referred to Silchar Medical College & Hospitals and later, on 18.10.2020, at about 10:00 AM taking advantage of the illness of the victim, the appellants and other two accused entered into the farm house of the complainant, broke open the door of the guard’s room which was under lock and key and took away the betel-vine, betel-nut, bamboo tree etc. therefrom and stolen the articles and occupied the house which is stated to be value added around Rs. 7,000/- to Rs. 8,000/- and the value of the betel-vine, betel-nut and bamboo was about Rs. 50,000/-. The said FIR was received as Panchgram O.P. GD Entry No. 276, dated 19.10.2010 and forwarded to the Officer-In-Charge of Algapur Police Station for registering a case and accordingly, Algapur P.S. Case No. 250/2010 under Sections 147/148/149/447/448/325/326/ 379/380/302 of the Indian Penal Code was registered. It appears that subsequently Panchgram Police Out-post was upgraded to Panchgram Police Station and the said case was re-registered as Panchgram P.S. Case No. 35/2012 dated 15.03.2012 under Sections 147/148/149/447/448/325/326/ 379/380/302 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. It appears that after registration of the case, the victim had expired. After the accused charge for the offence, two accused persons, namely, Hannan Rahman and Mujibur Rahman could not be apprehended and by an order dated 04.10.2018 the case against these two accused persons was filed. In so far as 6 (six) appellants are concerned, furnishing them with the copies as required under Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Hailakandi, by an order dated 14.11.2018, committed the case to trial before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Hailakandi and the trial was assigned to the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hailakandi and the charges under Sections 147/148/149/ 447/448/325/326/379/380/302 of the Indian Penal Code were framed against all the appellants and charges were read over and explained to them to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. The prosecution examined 10 (ten) witnesses namely, Md. Abdur Rejak Choudhury (PW-1), Must. Alfatun Nessa (PW-2), Md. Jamal Uddin (PW-3), Md. Abdul Malik Barbhuiya

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top