The admissibility of confessions and the necessity of establishing a conclusive chain of circumstantial evidence are crucial for conviction in murder cases. Procedural violations render confessions inadmissible.

JUDGMENT :

M. Choudhury, J.

This criminal appeal from Jail under Section 383 , Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [‘the Code’ or ‘CrPC’, for short] is directed against a Judgment and Order dated 11.01.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Udalguri in Sessions Case no. 83 of 2018. By the Judgment and Order dated 11.01.2021, the accused-appellant on being found guilty of the offence of matricide under Section 300 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE [IPC], has been sentenced under Section 302 , IPC to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for further three months. It has been ordered that the period of detention, if any, already undergone by the accused-appellant during the course of investigation, inquiry or trial shall be set-off against the term of imprisonment in terms of Section 428 , CrPC.

2. The investigation into the alleged crime of matricide was started on institution of a First Information Report [FIR] before the Officer In-Charge, Panery Police Station on 30.08.2017 by one Binoy Deka as the informant naming the accused as the perpetrator of the crime. In the FIR [Ext.-1], the informant had inter alia stated that in the morning hours on that day, that is, on 30.08.2017, the accused entered into an altercation with the elder sister of the informant, Dharmeswari Kandha who was the mother of the accused, over some domestic matter. The accused had, in the process, caused severe injury on her neck by hacking with a dao inside their house itself and as a result, the informant’s elder sister met instantaneous death on the spot itself.

3. On receipt of the FIR, the Officer In-Charge, Panery Police Station registered the same as Panery Police Station Case no. 68/2017 [corresponding G.R. Case no. 1013/2017] for the offence under Section 302 , IPC and entrusted the investigation of the case to one Prabin Chandra Deka [P.W.13], a Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Panery Police Station.

4. It has emerged from the materials on record that prior to lodgment of the FIR [Ext.-1], the accused, a resident of Line no. 13, Village – Bhutiachang Tea Estate surrendered himself in Panery Police Station at around 06-30 a.m. on 30.08.2017 allegedly stating that he had murdered his mother, Dharmeswari Kandha in their house by cutting her neck by means of a dao [machete] and that the dao by means of which he committed the act of matricide was lying on the bed beside the dead-body of his mother. According to the I.O. [P.W.13], a general diary entry being General Diary Entry no. 603 dated 30.08.2017 was registered by the Officer In-Charge, Panery Police Station on the basis of such information. As the accused surrendered himself in the Police Station in the afore-stated manner, he was taken into custody immediately on such surrender and his statement was also recorded.

5. As the task of preliminary investigation was entrusted to him after the registration of General Diary Entry no. 603, the I.O. [P.W.13] proceeded to the place of occurrence [P.O.] with the accused. On reaching of P.O., that is, the house of the deceased, the I.O. [P.W.13] stated to have recorded the statements the available witnesses available at the P.O. under Section 161 , CrPC. The I.O. [P.W.13] also drew up a Sketch Map of the P.O. [Ext.-5]; and seized a blood stained dao which was lying by the side of the deadbody, vide a Seizure List [Ext.-4] on 30.08.2017 in presence of witnesses. Thereafter, the dead-body of Dharmeswari Kandha was brought to the Police Station for post-mortem examination. Prior to sending the deadbody for post-mortem examination, the I.O. [P.W.13] got th