Confessional statements of co-accused alone are insufficient for conviction; corroborative evidence is essential to link the accused to the crime.

JUDGMENT

T. Amarnath Goud, J. - Heard Mr. A. Acharjee, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. S. Debnath, learned Additional PP appearing on behalf of the respondent.

2. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 24.07.2017 passed in connection with case No. S.T./T-1/ 0000038/2016 by the learned Sessions Judge, Dharmanagar, North Tripura, whereby and whereunder the learned Sessions Judge had convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC, and sentenced them to suffer R.I. for life with default stipulation.

3. The case of the prosecution, as surfaced at the trial, may, in brief, be described as under:

One Dahindra Tripura on 23.05.2016 lodged an FIR stating interalia that on 23.05.2016 at about 5:30 pm Amenjoy Tripura called and took Biyakchunga, the sister in law of the informant, and told that Sumanjoy Tripura and Jugal Mohan Tripura were waiting for him for diving the loan amount amoung them at the road of Sabwal. After about half an hour one person namely Chama Reang informed the informant that near the Subwal road in a lunga he heard sound like 'gher gher' and requested the informant to come at the place with people and then the informant alongwith Sunuhar Tripura, Ajoy kr. Tripura, Smt. Matibala Tripura and Jarendra Tripura went there alongwith a torch light. There the informant after searching with Chama Reang alongwith others found a dead body of a person and when he focused the light of the torch over the body he identified that it was the dead body of Biyakchunga and there were mark of sharp cutting injuries on the throat, back side of the head and hand of the dead body of Biyakchunga. There they also found a blood stained dao near the dead body.

4. The said complaint was registered as Vanghmun PS case no. 04 of 2015 under Section 302 /34 IPC. The matter was investigated by the investigating officer and after completion of investigation submitted charge-sheet against the convict appellant and others under Sections 120(B)/420/302/201 IPC. At the commencement of trial, the learned Sessions Judge had framed charges against the convict appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. During trial, the prosecution to establish the charges had adduced 19 (nineteen) witnesses. After closure of recording evidences, the convict appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. wherein he denied all the allegations leveled against him by the prosecution witnesses since, according to the appellants, those were false. After hearing arguments and on examining the evidences and materials on record, the learned Sessions Judge had acquitted the convict-appellant from the charges framed against him under Sections 120(B)/420/201 IPC, but, convicted and sentenced him for committing offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. Hence, this appeal before this court.

6. Mr. A. Acharjee, learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the charges levelled against the convict-appellants. Mr. Acharjee, learned counsel has further submitted that there is no legal evidence against the appellant. Mr. Acharjee, learned counsel had argued that out of two accused persons involved in commission of the offence, one, namely, Manohari Tripura had been honourably acquitted by this court. Learned counsel also has submitted that the learned trial court had convicted the appellant only on the basis of 3 witnesses i.e. PW-6, PW-7 and PW-9. Learned counsel has further argued that there is no eye witness to the alleged incident and according to the post-mortem report the injuries are ante-mortem in nat