HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
T. Amarnath Goud, Arindam Lodh, JJ.
Martuja Uddin Choudhury & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Tripura - Respondent
Crl. A. (J) No. 37 of 2020
Decided On : 16-03-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. prosecution's allegations of assault leading to death. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. defendants challenging evidence and conviction. (Para 6 , 7 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. witness testimonies detailing the assault. (Para 12 , 13 , 18) |
| 4. medical evidence linking assault to cause of death. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 5. court's reasoning on witness credibility and factual continuity. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 36) |
| 6. affirmation of conviction based on evidentiary support. (Para 37 , 38) |
JUDGMENT
T. Amarnath Goud, J. - Heard Mr. D.K. Deb, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. R. Datta, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Tripura-respondent.
2. This criminal appeal under Section-374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 16.11.2019 & 18.11.2019 respectively, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar, in Case No. S.T.(Type-1) 25 of 2015, whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been convicted to undergo imprisonment for life for committing offence under Section-302 of IPC read with Section-34 of IPC and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- [ten thousand] each.
3. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 14.09.2014, one Mst. Anowara Begam (PW-5) wife of late Ala Uddin of Baghan, P.S. Bazaricherra, District-Karimganj, Assam lodged an ejahar with the Officer-in-Charge of Churaibari police station to the effect that on 13.09.2014 at about 2100 hours, her son, Amirul Islam went out form home riding on his motor bike to go to Kadamtala, but, while he reached at Baghan village in front of the house of accused Mortuja Ahmed Choudhury, the accused-appellant, Kabir Uddin, Khayrul Hussain, Jabir Hussain, Jashim Udin and Jamal Uddin wrongfully restrained him by blocking the road with tree of betel nut and they assaulted him with a piece of wood for which he received grievous bleeding injuries. It is also stated that the accused-persons also assaulted Anowar Hussain who was also accompanied with Amirul Islam and both of them were shifted to Dhamanagar Hospital and thereafter, both of them were taken to Silchar Medical College & Hospital. Considering the critical condition of the son of the complainant, he was referred TO Guwahati but, on the way at Jorabat, Meghalaya, her son succumbed to the injuries.
4. On receipt of the same, police registered a criminal case against the appellants and others, vide Churaibari P.S. Case No. 2014 CRB 033 for commission of offences punishable under Sections-341/323/302/34 of IPC and started investigation. On completion of the investigation, police submitted the charge-sheet against (i) Martuja Uddin Choudhury (ii) Md. Jamal Uddin (iii) Md. Kabir Uddin Choudhury (iv) Anwar Hussain Choudhury (v) Khayrul Hussain @ Choudhury (vi) Jabir Hussain and (vii) Jasim Uddin @ Atai Choudhury for the commission of offences punishable under Sections-341/323/302/34 of IPC.
5. On receipt of the charge-sheet, learned Magistrate took cognizance and committed the case for trial before the learned Sessions Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar and the case was registered and marked as S.T. (T-1) 25 of 2015. It is further stated that charge was framed against all the accused persons named above under Sections-341/323/302 of IPC read with Section-34 of IPC to which the accused-persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6. To prove the case, prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses and exhibited some documents [Exbts. 1 to 17 and Exbt. A] as well as some material objects. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused-appellants were examined under Section-313 of Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating circumstances which were elicited from the evidence on record and the incriminating evidence were read over and explained to he accused-persons in Bengali in open Court to which they denied the truth of the prosecution evidence claiming themselves to be innocent and denied to adduce any witness on their behalf.
The conviction under sections 302 and 34 of IPC was affirmed due to overwhelming eyewitness testimony establishing participation in a group assault leading to homicide.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and serious contradictions in witness testimonies can lead to the overturning of convictions.
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and failure to do so, due to contradictions and lack of corroboration, cannot sustain a conviction.
The court confirmed that minor discrepancies in witness testimonies do not undermine the evidential basis for conviction if core facts are established beyond reasonable doubt.
The prosecution's burden is to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, with eyewitness testimony being critical, and discrepancies in procedural reports do not invalidate a solid case.
The prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, highlighting the essential legal principle that mere suspicion cannot sustain a conviction.
The court modified the conviction from murder under Section 302 to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part II, establishing the accused's knowledge that his actions were like....
The assembly of individuals armed with deadly weapons, with a common intent to commit violence, constitutes an unlawful assembly under IPC, leading to vicarious liability for all members.
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.