GUWAHATI, India, Feb. 10 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Jan. 9:
1] Heard Mr. Atal Tewari, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant. Also heard Ms. B. Bhuyan, learned Senior Counsel/Additional Public Prosecutor assisted by Ms. R. Das, learned counsel appearing for the State respondent.
2] This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.12.2020 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Udalguri (hereinafter referred to as the "trial court"), in Sessions Case No. 44/2019 (arising out of G.R. Case No. 74/2018), 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 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 (three) months.
3] The prosecution case in brief is that upon a quarrel having taken place between the deceased, i.e., the husband of the accused/appellant and the accused/appellant on 21.01.2018 (Sunday) around 7 pm, the accused/appellant assaulted the deceased on the head with firewood, resulting in the death of the deceased. Thereafter, an F.I.R. was lodged on the following morning at around 10 am by PW-1 (Guddu Karua), who resides in the neighbourhood. Accordingly, an investigation commenced, whereafter the Investigating Officer, investigated the matter by interrogating the witnesses and arresting the accused/appellant.
4] Upon completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted vide charge-sheet No. 4 of 2019 against the accused/appellant under Section 302 of the IPC. Thereafter, the trial court framed charges against the accused/appellant under Section 302 of the IPC and commenced the trial.
5] During the trial the prosecution examined 7 (seven) prosecution witnesses, including the informant/PW-1, PW-2 (Sankar Sonari), PW-3 (Panda Munda), PW-4 (Jiten Tanti), PW-5 (Smti. Nalini Brahma, WSI), the Investigating Officer PW-6 (S.I. Maheswar Sarmah), and the Medical Officer PW-7 (Dr. Arindom Bora). After closure of the prosecution evidence, all the incriminating circumstances were put to the accused/appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the "Cr.P.C."), wherein the accused/appellant, after denying the circumstances, stated that she is innocent and that on the date of occurrence in the evening at about 5 pm, after coming from her work in the tea garden, she found the dead body of her husband lying in the room of their house, and accordingly, she informed the Gaonburha. However, the accused/appellant did not adduce any evidence in support of her defence. The trial court, after hearing the parties, found the accused/appellant guilty of the charge under Section 302 of the IPC and convicted the accused/appellant thereunder and sentenced her thereof. Situated thus, the present criminal appeal has been preferred.
6] Mr. Atal Tewari, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant, submits that the conviction is erroneous on the grounds that the accused/appellant was not present in the house at the time of the occurrence; the prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence, which does not form a complete chain; and the trial court erred in drawing an adverse inference against the accused/appellant. He further relies upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Anees vs. The State Govt. of NCT, reported in (2024) 0 Supreme (SC) 409.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=QnBUxJ6a3gIx%2B5SFrUiAoDn8qDeIcFG2Nf5cZdXZI6NNaMLXqovOMK9qwh5OJEDP&caseno=CRL.A(J)/27/2021&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010165182021&state_code=6&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
