Shri Raju Debnath Alias Mithu vs The State Of Tripura Through The ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 197 Tri

                                 Page 1 of 5




                    HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                       A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A

                        Crl. A(J) No. 25 of 2019

      Shri Raju Debnath alias Mithu, son of Shri Rabindra Debnath,
      resident of Netaji Palli, Belonia, P.O. Belonia, P.S. Belonia,
      District: South Tripura.

                                                        .....Appellant

                              -V E R S U S-

      The State of Tripura through the learned Public Prosecutor,
      High Court of Tripura, Agartala.

                                                     ..... Respondent.

B_E_F_O_R_E HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH

For Appellant(s) : Mr. S. M. Chakraborty, Sr. Advocate.

Ms. P. Chakraborty, Advocate.

For Respondent(s)         :      Mr. Ratan Datta, P.P.
Date of hearing
and delivery of
judgment and order        :      18.02.2021
Whether fit for reporting :      NO


                    JUDGMENT & ORDER [ORAL]

Heard Mr. S. M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. P. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Ratan Datta, learned P.P. appearing for the State-respondent.

[2] The present appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 25.03.2019 passed by the learned Sessions

Judge, South Tripura, Belonia in Case No. S.T. (S.T/B) 37 of 2016 whereby and whereunder, the convict-appellant has been sentenced to suffer RI for 4 [four] years with fine of Rs. 1,000/- for committing offence under Section-307 of IPC.

[3] The prosecution case as projected by the learned Sessions Judge is as under:

"Victim Smt. Rakhi Debnath was given marriage with accused Raju Debnath. Although a son was born out of their wedlock but Raju used to torture victim Rakhi on his demand of money. Raju started torturing Rakhi on the allegation that Rakhi developed illicit relationship with the private tutor of her son. Over that issue a village salishi was held and victim was taken to her paternal house on 01.01.2016. A written resolution was adopted in the salishi.

On 02,.01.2016 accused Raju went to the paternal house of the victim at SBC Nagar at around 11 a.m. and called Rakhi. When Rakhi appeared near to the gate, accused Raju delivered a few dao blows on Rahi. Rakhi sustained huge cut injuries and fell down on the ground. Some people assembled at the P.O. and accused fled away. Rakhi was immediately shifted to Belonia hospital.

Depicting these fact, Dilip Debnath, the father of victim Rakhi lodged written ejahar with the O/C, Women P.S., Belonia on 02.01.2016 at 1200 hours which was registered as Belonia Women P.S. Case No. 1/16, under Sec. 498-A, 447, 326 & 307 IPC. W/S.I, Swapna Bhowmik investigated the case. During investigation she examined available witnesses, collected medical evidence and also arrested the accused person. On completion of investigation she filed charge sheet on 30.04.2016 against accused Raju Debnath alias Mithu for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 498-A, 447, 324 & 307 IPC.

[4] In course of trial, the learned Sessions Judge had framed the charges against the appellant under Section-498A of the IPC as well as under Section-307 of IPC. During trial, the prosecution had examined as

many as 15 witnesses. After completion of recording of evidence, the accused-appellant was examined under Section-313 of Cr. P.C. where he was noticed about all the incriminating evidence and materials brought on record to which, he denied the evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses but, he denied to adduce any evidence on his behalf.

[5] Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the learned Judge had passed the judgment of conviction and sentence as aforestated.

[6] Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence, the accused-appellant has presented the instant appeal.

[7] In course of hearing of the appeal before this Court, Mr. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that undoubtedly the appellant has committed the offence, but, according to Mr. Chakraborty, the conviction of the appellant under Section-307 of IPC, is not sustainable for the reason that the nature of injuries which the victim had suffered were of simple in nature as observed by the medical officer during the victim's medical examination. According to Mr. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel, the accused- appellant may be convicted under Section-324 of the IPC and in that case paying of a fine may be imposed upon him.

[8] On the other hand, Mr. Datta, learned P.P. appearing for the State-respondent has vehemently opposed the interpretation of Mr. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel that the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge under Section-307 of IPC is unsustainable. According to Mr. Datta, learned P.P., the nature of weapon

the convict-appellant had used in committing the crime is well covered by the definition of Section-307 of IPC.

[9] Mr. Datta, learned P.P. has further submitted that the appellant had committed the offence in front of his son and sister who were very much present at the place of occurrence. More so, the accused- appellant went to the father in law's house where his victim wife was staying at that time. After going to the house of his father in law, the accused-appellant had called her to come out of her room, the wife- victim came up and entered into some altercations. All on a sudden, the appellant had brought the 'Dao' i.e. the weapon of offence from his back and inflicted cut injuries on the various parts of the body of his wife. According to Mr. Datta, learned P.P., the intention of the appellant was to kill his wife.

[10] Having gone through the evidence on record and particularly, the statement of the medical officer, in my opinion, the conviction of the appellant is to be affirmed. However, on minute perusal of the nature of the injuries, in my opinion, the sentence to suffer RI may be reduced to 1[one] year instead of 4[four] years of RI as imposed upon the appellant by the learned Sessions Judge. Accordingly, the sentence is reduced to 1 [one] year instead of 4[four] years. That apart, I also impose a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- [one lakh] to be paid by the convict-appellant to his wife-victim within 30th April, 2021. The bail bond as furnished by the appellant shall be continued up to 30th April, 2021. The appellant shall surrender himself before the learned Sessions Judge, Belonia, South Tripura on 1st May, 2021 at 10.30 A.M positively to suffer the remaining period of sentence. The period of imprisonment which the appellant has already suffered, is set off.

[11] It is made clear that if the appellant fails to make the payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- as fine to the wife-victim within 30th April, 2021, then, he has to suffer RI for 3[three] years. The appellant is further directed to furnish the payment receipt at the time of his surrender before the learned Sessions Judge. It is further made clear that the convict- appellant shall deposit the fine money of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the 'Nazir' of the court of learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura and the Nazir is directed to make payment of fine money of Rs. 1,00,000/- to the wife of the appellant within a period of 7 [seven] days from the date of receipt of fine amount and Nazir is to inform the learned Sessions Judge on 1 st of May, 2021 about the payment deposited as directed by this Court.

[12] In the result, the present appeal stands partly allowed. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

JUDGE

A.Ghosh