The conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence was found insufficient, and the court required proof beyond reasonable doubt, which was not met.

JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT & ORDER

Heard the learned Amicus Curiae Ms. A. Devi for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam Mr. A. Konwor for the State respondents.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 20.12.2018 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Darrang, Mangaldai in Sessions Case No. 69(DM)/2017, whereby the sole appellant Nagen Deka was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1 (one) year.

3. Prosecution case, in a nutshell, was that on 21.04.2016, at about 10 AM, when the victim Rita Deka @ Juri Deka was preparing food in the kitchen, the appellant suddenly entered the kitchen and inflicted serious injuries on her face, left ear, back etc. and consequently she died at the spot. The appellant was apprehended by the people and handed over to Police. The elder brother of the victim lodged a written report with the Mangaldai Police Station. Treating the said written report (Exhibit-1) as FIR, Police registered Mangaldai P.S. Case No. 268/2016 under Section 302 IPC and commenced the investigation. During the investigation, the Police recorded the statement of the witnesses, seized the alleged weapon of offence, subjected the body to post-mortem examination and upon completion of the investigation laid charge-sheet against the appellant, who eventually stood trial before the Court of Sessions.

4. During the course of trial, learned Sessions Judge framed charge under Section 302 IPC against the appellant, to which, he pleaded not guilty. 15 (fifteen) witnesses were examined by the prosecution to substantiate the charge. The accused-appellant was also examined under Section 313 CrPC, wherein he took the plea of innocence. Accused also examined himself as DW-1.

5. The informant Arun Deka has been examined as PW-1, who stated in his deposition that having come to know about the occurrence from his younger brother Hiranya Deka (PW- 4), immediately rushed to the place of occurrence and found the body of the victim lying in the courtyard. He also stated to have found the accused-appellant being kept tied with a bamboo post. He also stated to have noticed cut injury on the body of the deceased.

6. PW-2 Prafulla Saharia and PW-3 Tilak Saikia testified that having heard from the co- villagers that the accused killed his wife, they came to the house of the deceased and found the accused kept tied with a bamboo post. PW-3 also stated, that he had seen the body of the deceased lying on the ground. During cross-examination both of them admitted to have not stated before Police, that they came to the place of occurrence having heard that the accused killed his wife or that they had seen the appellant kept tied with a bamboo post.

7. PW-6 Urmila Deka is the mother of the deceased. According to her, on the day of occurrence she was in the paternal home of her daughter-in-law. Her younger son informed her over phone, that accused killed her daughter (deceased). Having received the information, she came home and found the deceased lying in the forecourt. She also stated to have seen the accused having been kept tied with a bamboo post by the villagers.

8. According to PW-7 Binumoni Saikia @ Dulumoni Saikia, she came to the place of occurrence having heard hue and cry and had seen the body of the deceased lying in the courtyard. She further stated that s