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

2025 Supreme(Gau) 117

THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI, K. SEMA, JJ
Topeswar Rabha S/o. Sri Munna Rabha - Appellant
Versus
State Of Assam - Respondent
CRL.A(J)/68/2022
Decided On : 17-02-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: MS S ROY (Amicus Curiae), MR. K SARMA,MR. S BORUAH
For the Respondent: PP, ASSAM

IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed the conviction under Section 302 IPC based on credible eyewitness testimony and established that the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

(A) Indian Penal Code - Section 302 - Conviction for murder - Appellant convicted for life imprisonment and fine for the murder of the deceased, based on the evidence of eyewitnesses and circumstantial evidence. The court emphasized the clarity of the FIR and the consistency of witness testimonies. (Paras 1 , 2 , 22 , 30 )

(B) Eyewitness Testimony - The testimony of the sole eyewitness was deemed credible and corroborated by other witnesses, leading to a conviction despite the appellant's claims of alibi. (Paras 22 , 30 )

(C) Standards of Proof - The court reiterated that the prosecution does not need to eliminate every doubt, but must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 30 , 31 )

Facts of the case:

The appellant was accused of assaulting the deceased with a bamboo stick, leading to his death days later. The FIR did not name the appellant but described him as the son of Munna Rabha. (Paras 2 , 16 )

Findings of Court:

The evidence presented was sufficient to affirm the conviction under Section 302 IPC, with no substantial doubts raised about the appellant's involvement. (Paras 30 , 32 )

Issues: The court addressed the clarity of the FIR, the identity of the appellant, and the sufficiency of evidence for conviction. (Paras 16 , 30 )

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the eyewitness account, supported by circumstantial evidence, was adequate to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, rejecting the appellant's alibi. (Paras 22 , 30 )

Result: Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. Medhi , J.

The instant appeal was initially preferred from jail against judgment and order dated 06.05.2022 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur in Sessions Case No. 04/2019 convicted the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to undergo SI for another 3 months. However, subsequently, learned counsel has been engaged on behalf of the appellant.

2. The criminal law was set into motion by lodging of an Ejahar by PW1, who is the brother of the deceased. The Ejahar which was lodged on 01.05.2018 had alleged that on the previous day i.e. 30.04.2018 at about 04:00 PM, his elder brother Raju Bhengra, who was aged about 75 years, was assaulted by the accused persons with bamboo stick causing grievous injury. As a result of the said assault, his elder brother had become unconscious and fell on the ground. On hearing the news, the informant had come and saw his elder brother on the ground in an unconscious state and he was taken to the Dhekiajuli Monbor Nath Primary Health Centre. However, for better treatment, he was referred to the Tezpur Medical College Hospital (hereinafter, TMCH). Based on the aforesaid Ejahar, the formal FIR was registered and investigation was done leading to laying of the Charge Sheet. The charges were accordingly framed and on its denial, the trial had begun in which the prosecution had adduced evidence through 11 nos. of witnesses. It may be mentioned that at the time of lodging of an FIR, the elder brother of the informant was still alive. However, within 3 days, the elder brother passed away and accordingly, Section 302 of the IPC was added.

3. PW1 is the informant, who is the brother of the victim. He had stated that on the fateful day at about 04:00 PM, the deceased had gone to bring cattle from the field. The appellant was chasing away two boys who were there on the field and not succeeding, he had assaulted the back side of the head of the deceased with slitted bamboo. The 2 boys informed him about the incident when the PW1 was collecting betel nut. He along with another person – Ujjal Sarkar (PW3) rushed to the field and found his elder brother in a senseless condition and also found the accused sitting on the field with a split bamboo. When he had asked the accused why he had assaulted his brother, the accused attempted to attack him with a dao. He accordingly, returned home and went to the Police Station. The deceased was taken to the Hospital. The FIR has been proved as Ext. 1. He has also deposed that after three days from shifting to the TMCH, his elder brother had expired. In his cross-examination, though he had deposed that he did not know the number of sons of Munna Rabha, it was not a fact that before the Police or in the FIR, he did not mention the name of the accused.

4. PW2 is a person of the locality, who had deposed that on the fateful afternoon, he had gone to the field to bring cattle and the deceased had also gone to bring his cattle. At that time, two boys were chasing the cattle and the accused, after chasing the boys with a lathi had assaulted the deceased, over his head, as a result of which he had sustained injuries with bleeding and fell on the ground. Thereafter, he along with the informant and one son-in-law had taken the deceased home and then to the Hospital. At the TMCH, the deceased had expired after 3-4 days. The lathi was seized which was produced by the informant and PW2 is a witness in the Seizure List. PW2 was subjected to cross-examination.

5. PW3 is a co-villager and on that day, he had gone to the house of the informant to collect betel nut and when he was sitting along with the informant, they heard a hue and cry that the deceased was killed. Then the informant had rushed to the place of occurrence followed by him and they found the deceased lying on the f


                              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