IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Manish Choudhury, Robin Phukan, JJ.
Sri Birsha Murah, S/o Late Pusku Murah - Appellant
Versus
The State of Assam - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (J) no. 56/2019
Decided On : 10-04-2024
The instant criminal appeal under Section 383 read with Section 374[2], Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [‘the CrPC’ or ‘the Code’, for short] from jail is directed against a Judgment and Order dated 07.03.2019 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Dibrugarh in Sessions Case no. 112/2015 [The State of Assam vs. Sri Birsha Murah]. By the said Judgment and Order dated 07.03.2019, the accused-appellant has been convicted for the charge of murder under Section 302, Indian Penal Code [IPC] and he has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another period of 1 [one] month. In addition, the accused-appellant has also been convicted for the offences under Section 325, IPC and Section 324, IPC. For the offence under Section 325, IPC, the accused-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 [five] years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for another 1 [one] month. For the offence under Section 324, IPC, the accused-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 [one] year.
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, was that on 22.03.2012, a First Information Report [FIR] was lodged before the In-Charge, Ghoramara Police Out Post by the informant-P.W.2 alleging inter alia to the effect that at around 07-00/08-00 p.m. on 21.03.2012, the accused persons, namely, [i] the accused-appellant, Sri Birsha Murah; [ii] Smti. Rambha Murah, wife of Sri Birsha Murah; and [iii] Sri Debra Murah, son of Sri Birsha Murah; all residents of Rachi Line, Ramai Tea Garden; got engaged in a dispute with [i] the brother of the informant-P.W.2, Bideshia Mirdha; [ii] Sri Shyamlal Mirdha @ Putlu Mirdha; and [iii] Smti. Lakhi Mirdha, wife of Sri Shyamlal Mirdha; residents of the same Line and in the process, the accused persons caused grievous injuries on them with axe and hoe. As a result, Bideshia Mirdha died on the spot. As Sri Shyamlal Mridha and Smti. Lakhi Mirdha sustained grievous injuries on their persons, they were undergoing treatment in critical conditions in the Assam Medical College & Hospital [AMC&H], Dibrugarh.
3. On receipt of the said FIR, the In-Charge, Ghoramara Police Out Post registered the same vide General Diary Entry no. 334 dated 22.03.2012 and forwarded the FIR to the Officer In-Charge, Lahowal Police Station for registering the same under proper sections of law. At the same time, the In-Charge, Ghoramara Police Out Post, Sri Bhupen Kumar Sarma, Sub-Inspector of Police [P.W.14] took up the investigation of the case. On receipt of the FIR, the Office In-Charge, Lahowal Police Station registered the same as Lahowal Police Station Case no. 38/2012, on 22.03.2012, for the offences under Sections 302/326/34, Indian Penal Code [IPC] and entrusted the investigation to P.W.14.
4. The Investigating Officer [I.O.] of the case, P.W.14 during the course of investigation visited the place of occurrence on 22.03.2012 itself and held the inquest on the deadbody of the deceased, Bideshia Mirdha. After inquest, he prepared an Inquest Report [Ext.-1]. In order to ascertain the actual cause of death, the deadbody was sent to the AMC&H, Dibrugarh vide a Deadbody Challan [Ext.-4] for conducting post-mortem examination. The I.O. of the case also prepared a Sketch Map [Ext.-7]. The post-mortem examination on the dead body was conducted at the AMC&H on 22.03.2012 by Dr. Nayanmoni Pathak [P.W.11], Assistant Professor, Department of Forensic Medicine, AMC&H. Meanwhile, the injured persons viz. Sri Shyamlal Mirdha and Smti. Lakhi Mirdha had also undergone treatment at the AMC&H. The injured person, Sri Shyamlal Mirdha after initial treatment at the AMC&H, was referred to M/s Sanjivani Diagnostics & Hospital, Dibrugarh for better treatment. The I.O. of the case upon completion of investigation, submitted a charge sheet under Section 173[2], CrPC vi
Abdul Syed vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Amit vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Annareddy Sambasiva Reddy v. State of A.P.
Balraje v. State of Maharashtra
Bonkya v. State of Maharashtra
Dalip Singh v. State of Punjab
Dinesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan
Ganapathi vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Gangabhavani vs. Rayapati Venkat Reddy
Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab
Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab
Malkhan Singh v. State of U.P.
Mohd. Rojali vs. State of Assam
Ramlagan Singh v. State of Bihar
Shivalingappa Kallayanappa v. State of Karnataka
V.K. Mishra and another vs. State of Uttarakhand and another
The court affirmed the conviction for murder and grievous hurt, emphasizing the reliability of eyewitness testimony and medical evidence in establishing guilt.
The court affirmed the conviction for murder, establishing that the accused's actions demonstrated intent to kill, supported by credible eyewitness and medical evidence.
The testimony of injured witnesses is highly credible, and direct evidence can establish guilt without needing to prove motive.
Eyewitness accounts, particularly from injured witnesses, are pivotal in establishing guilt despite minor discrepancies; prior enmity reinforces motives for violent offenses.
The prosecution failed to prove the charges of murder and unlawful assembly beyond reasonable doubt due to unreliable witness testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence.
The prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt; inconsistencies in witness testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence led to the acquittal of the appellant.
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.