In the absence of premeditation and prior animosity, a fatal assault arising from a sudden domestic quarrel, where the accused subsequently attempts to secure medical aid, constitutes culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part-II IPC rather than murder under Section 302 IPC.

JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

(Kaushik Goswami, J)

Heard Ms. B.R.A. Sultana, learned Legal Aid Counsel, appearing for the appellant. Also heard Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent No.1.

2] The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.04.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge (POCSO), Tinsukia (hereinafter referred to as the “trial court”), in Sessions Case No. 174/2023, whereby the accused/appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the “IPC”), and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six years.

3] The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant, Nirmal Tanti (PW-2), lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Phillobari Police Station stating that his daughter, aged about 25 years, had married the accused/appellant about three years prior to the occurrence, and out of the said wedlock, a male child aged about three months was born. Both the deceased and the accused were working in a tea garden owned by Goutam Tamang at Bishnupur Phillobari, under Phillobari Police Station in the district of Tinsukia.

4] On 06.06.2023, at about 7:00 p.m., while they were at the tea garden labour camp, the accused/appellant allegedly assaulted his wife after she expressed anger over his consumption of alcohol. It is alleged that the accused severely beat the deceased and also struck her on the neck and back with a stick, causing serious injuries. The victim was subsequently taken to Tinsukia for medical treatment but succumbed to her injuries on the way to the hospital.

5] Accordingly, the police registered Phillobari P.S. Case No. 25/2023 under Section 302 IPC and took up investigation. Upon completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted before the trial court under Section 302 IPC. The accused having pleaded not guilty, the trial court framed charge under Section 302 IPC and proceeded with the trial.

6] During trial, the prosecution examined six witnesses, including the medical officer, Dr. Palash Jyoti Dutta (PW-1); the informant, Sri Nirmal Tanti (PW-2); Smt. Shanti Tanti (PW-3); Sri Goutam Tamang (PW-4); Sri Babul Kalita (PW-5); and the Investigating Officer, Sri Bongshi Timung (PW-6).

7] After completion of recording of evidence, all incriminating circumstances were put to the accused/appellant during his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.”), wherein he generally denied the same. He did not adduce any defence evidence.

8] The trial court, after hearing learned counsel for both the parties, rendered the impugned judgment and order, which is under challenge in the present appeal, whereby the accused/appellant was held guilty of the offence charged and sentenced accordingly.

9] Ms. B.R.A. Sultana, learned Legal Aid Counsel appearing for the appellant, submits that there is no evidence whatsoever of the accused/appellant having assaulted the deceased resulting in her death. She further submits that the accused/appellant has categorically stated in his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that he was not present at home at the time of the occurrence and, upon returning home and seeing his wife lying on the ground, he informed PW-3. It is contended that the impugned conviction, being based on surmises and conjectures, cannot be sustained in law.

10] Per contra, Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, submits that it stands established from the prosecution evidence that the accused/appellant was present at his residence at the time of the occurrence. The medical evidence clearly establishes that the deceased was assaulted, resulting in her death. The explanation offered by the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. has not been substantiated by any e