HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA, AGARTALA
T. AMARNATH GOUD, BISWAJIT PALIT, JJ.
Sri Tarani Kalai, Son of Late Kartik Kalai – Applicant
Versus
The State of Tripura, Represented by the Secretary, Department of Home, Government of Tripura – Respondents
Crl.A(J)No.42 of 2024
Decided On : 12-03-2025
Advocates Appeared :
For the Appellant : Mr. Anjan Kanti Pal, Adv.
For the Respondents : Mr. Raju Datta, P.P.
JUDGMENT :
Amarnath Goud, J.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 28.08.2023 and sentence dated 30.08.2023 delivered by Learned Sessions Judge, Gomati District, Udaipur in connection with S.T.39 of 2021. By the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence Learned Trial Court found the appellant to be guilty punishable under Section 307/341 of IPC and sentenced him to suffer RI for 10 years and fine of Rs.10,000/- in default to suffer further RI for three months under Section 307 of IPC and under Section 351 of IPC . The convict was sentenced to RI for fifteen days and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- in default to suffer further RI for one day and it was further ordered that both the sentences shall run concurrently.
2. Heard Learned Counsel Mr. A. K. Pal appearing for the appellant and also heard Learned P.P. Mr. Raju Datta appearing for the State. In course of hearing Learned counsel appearing for the appellant fairly submitted that in this case Learned Trial Court below has failed to appreciate the evidence on record properly and furthermore there is no independent eye witness of the alleged occurrence of offence excepting the evidence of the victim and as such Learned Trial Court without proper appreciation of the record wrongly found the appellant to be guilty under Section 307 read with Section 341 of IPC . He further submitted that prosecution before the Learned court below has failed to explain as to how the victim sustain injuries. As such in absence of proving of proper injury of the victim there was no scope on the part of the Learned court below to found the appellant to be guilty for the alleged charge punishable under Section 307 of IPC . It was further submitted that charge was not properly framed by the Learned court below and the evidence on record does not justify warrant of conviction against the appellant under Section 307 of IPC and alternatively Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that if it is found the appellant has committed the offence he may at best convicted under Section 324 of IPC and accordingly urged for dismissal of this appeal.
3. Per contra, Learned P.P. taking part in the hearing submitted that from the materials on record it appears that the accused committed the crime on the alleged day and from the statement of the victim and other corroborating evidence it is crystal clear that he has committed the crime and not only the appellant committed the crime but he caused several infliction of dao blows upon the person of the victim for which she sustained multiple injuries and Learned court below has rightly found the appellant to be guilty and convicted him accordingly and there is no merit in this appeal and urged for dismissal of the appeal with costs.
4. In this case the prosecution was set into motion on the basis of an FIR lodged by one Rajen Kalai alleging inter alia that on 26.11.2020 at about 1.30 p.m. his elder sister Rina Kalai (the victim) went to the pond in the lunga situated in the eastern direction of their home to provide water to the cow that time his maternal uncle (Mama) namely Tarani Kalai resident of Takkum Bari chased his elder sister to assault her and after that his sister returned back to home and informed him. Thereafter when the victim and the informant went towards the lunga to bring their cows that time their maternal uncle Tarani Kalai after seeing his ‘Didi’ started hacking her ‘Didi’ indiscriminately by a sharp-edged dao kept in his hand with the intention of killing his sister. Then on hearing hue and cry he went to save ‘Didi’ when his maternal uncle chased him with a dao. Thereafter younger maternal uncle Shambhu Kalai injured him by fist-blows. His elder sister sustained grievous injuries to the left ear and fell down on the ground and she sustained grievous bleeding injury on her left hand, head and other parts of the body and her ear fell on the ground due to the infliction of dao blows. After that his f
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt, and victim testimony can suffice even without independent witnesses if corroborated by other evidence.
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 essential ingredients for conviction under Section 307 IPC were not met in light of insufficient evidence regarding the accused's intent, leading to a downgrade of conviction to Section 324 IPC.
Evidence of sole testimony of an injured person is sufficient to bring home charges of grievous hurt.
In order to determine whether an offence under section 307 IPC is made out, crucial fact to be considered is intention and knowledge of appellant with which injuries were inflicted and not gravity of....
The court established that intention and knowledge are critical in determining the applicability of Sections 307 and 326 IPC in cases of grievous hurt and attempted murder.
The court affirmed that the appellant's actions constituted murder under Section 302 IPC, rejecting claims of provocation.
Although the accused had the intent to kill, yet, the assault was the out-come of a sudden quarrel, made in a heat of passion and without any premeditation
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.