Sri Haradhan Sabdakar vs The State Of Tripura
2022 Latest Caselaw 316 Tri

                                    Page 1 of 16


                       HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                          A_G_A_R_T_A_L_A
                            Crl.A(J). No. 20 of 2020

1.    Sri Haradhan Sabdakar, son of Sri Chanu Sabdakar, resident of
      Sabdakarpara, P.O. Ambassa, P.O. Ambassa, District: Dhalai,
      Tripura.

                                                              .....Appellant

                                  -V E R S U S-

1.    The State of Tripura.
                                             ..... Respondent.

B_E_F_O_R_E HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Debajit Biswas, Advocate.

For Respondent(s)             :      Mr. Ratan Datta, P.P.
Date of hearing               :      09.03.2022
Date of delivery of
judgment and order            :      16.03.2022
Whether fit for reporting     :      NO

                            JUDGMENT & ORDER
[T. Amarnath Goud, J]

Heard Mr. D. Biswas, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. R. Datta, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Tripura- respondent.

[2] This criminal appeal under Section- 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 05.11.2019, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhalai Judicial District, Ambassa, in Case No. S.T.(Type-1) 22 of 2018, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted to undergo imprisonment for life for committing offence under Section-302 of IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- [Five thousand] in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months. Further, he has been convicted under Section-201 of the IPC to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years with a fine of Rs.1, 000 [One thousand],

with default stipulations and it was ordered that both the sentences shall run concurrently.

[3] The prosecution story, in brief, is that the complainant of this case namely, Gopal Sabdakar (PW-1) who is also the father of the deceased Gunamani Sabdakar filed one oral ejahar on 29.03.2018 to the Officer-in- charge of Ambassa police station to the effect that on 29.03.2018 in the evening time his second son Gunamani Sabdakar alias Kala along with his friends went to Kulai Bazar and while returning from the market at about 7.30 pm Gunamani Sabdakar alias Kala and his friends namely, Viki, son of Rabi Sabdakar and Julu alias Bikramjit, son of Nirmal Deb were gossiping at ONGC Chowmuhani of Sabdakar Para sitting by the side of road. At about 7.45 pm, accused Shri Haradhan Sabdakar, the appellant herein, came at that spot with an Axe and suddenly started giving blows on the head of Gunamani Sabdakar indiscriminately for which Gunamani sustained grievous bleeding injuries on his head and as a result, fell down by the side of the road in unconscious condition. Thereafter, on receiving the information, police came to the spot and shifted Gunamani to Dhalai District Hospital, Kulai where the attending doctor declared him dead. Hearing the hue and cry, the villagers assembled at the place of occurrence and detained the accused Shri Haradhan Sabdakar and they handed over him to the police.

[4] After receipt of the said complaint, Ambassa police station case No.2018ABS 014 dated 29.03.2018 under Section-302 of IPC was registered and investigation has been commenced. After completion of the investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet against the appellant under Section- 302/201/506 of the IPC.

[5] Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Unakoti, Kamalpur by the learned SDJM, Kamalpur, Unakoti Judicial District. Subsequently, after creating of sessions division at Ambassa, the case was transferred before the learned Sessions Judge, Dhalai Judicial District.

[6] The learned trial Court framed charge under Sections-302/201 of the IPC against the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. To prove the charge, the prosecution examined as many as 14 witnesses and exhibited some documents [Exbts.1 to 14, 14/1] as well as material objects. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused-appellant was examined under Section-313 of Cr. P.C. to which the appellant denied the allegations and declined to adduce any defence witness.

[7] On the basis of the materials available on record and after hearing argument advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the learned Sessions Judge, Dhalai Judicial District, Ambassa on 05.11.2019, convicted the appellant under Section-302 read with Section-201 of IPC as aforementioned.

[8] The appellant herein, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with against the impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 05.11.2019, has preferred this appeal on the following grounds:

[9] Mr. Biswas, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the learned trial Court failed to appreciate the evidence on record in its perspective and thereby caused serious prejudice to the appellant. The Court below arrived at a wrong conclusion and the findings of the learned trial Court are mainly based on surmise and conjecture. Mr. Biswas, learned counsel has further submitted that the evidence on record do not constitute any offence punishable under Section-302 read with Section-201 of IPC. As such, the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence is liable to be set aside.

[10] Mr. Biswas, further contended that the findings of the learned trial Court are perverse, illegal and erroneous and the same is result of non- application of judicial mind. The learned trial Court has failed to apply its judicious mind in appreciating the evidences on record and accordingly, arrived at a wrong conclusion, which needs to be interfered with.

[11] Further, it would be evident from the deposition of the complainant as well as other family members of the complainant that there exists long family dispute between the complainant and the appellant. Thus, false implication of the appellant cannot be ruled out. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has further argued on the evidence of forensic report of the alleged blood stain from the axe that its origin and group could not be determined. Thus, the prosecution story that the appellant allegedly struck or injured the deceased by an axe is doubtful. As such, the judgment and conviction and sentence is liable to be set aside.

[12] For the purpose of arriving at a definite conclusion, let us, at the very beginning recapitulate the evidences adduced by the prosecution witness. PW-1, Shri Gopal Sabdakar, the father of the deceased Gunamani, who in h is examination-in-chief deposed that on 29.03.2018 his son, the deceased herein, went out of the house along with his friends, namely, Shri Viki Sabdakar and Shri Julu Deb and they were gossiping at ONGC colony at Sabdakar para sitting by the side of the road. He also deposed that at around 7.30pm on hearing hue and cry he went to the place of occurrence [P.O. for short] at ONGC chowmuhani and found his son lying dead with bleeding injury on his head. He further deposed that Viki Sabdakar and Julu Deb told him that accused Haradhan Sabdakar killed his son by giving blows on the head on his son with an axe. PW-1 further deposed that the villagers assembled at the P.O. and detained the accused. He further deposed that on receiving information, police also came at the spot and the villagers handed over the accused to the police. He has stated that his elder son also came to the P.O with him. Subsequently, police came and the dead body of his son has been brought to Kulai Hospital where the doctor declared him brought dead. He also deposed that the accused is his cousin brother and there was land dispute in between his family and the accused. Thereafter, he lodged oral complaint to the police officer appeared at the spot which was read over to him and he put his signature on it admitting the same to be correctly written. The signature of the witness in the complaint, on identification, was marked as Exbt.1.

[13] PW-2, Shri Romik Sabdakar @ Viki was the friend of deceased Gunamani Sabdakar and an eye witness to the occurrence. He has stated in his examination-in-chief that the deceased was killed by accused Haradhan Sabdakar on 29.03.2018 at ONGC Chowmuhani. He also deposed that on that day at around 7.00pm he along with deceased and Bikramjit were gossiping nearby a brick kiln and they were also enjoying film on their respective mobiles. He further stated that suddenly accused-appellant appeared there and struck a blow with an axe on the head of the deceased and as result, he sustained severe injury. He also averred that on the incident they tried to resist the accused, but the accused threatened them with dire consequences saying that he would kill them and thereafter fled away from the place of occurrence and gave information to the people who were present in a shop nearby the P.O. He has further stated that the accused was detained by the villagers and when police came to the spot, the villagers brought the accused at the spot and handed over him to the police. He also stated that the deceased was shifted to the hospital where he was declared dead. Subsequently, police seized the mobile set as produced by him. On identification, the mobile set of the accused was marked at Exbt.MO/1 and the signature of PW-2 in the seizure list which was marked as Exbt.2.

[14] During cross-examination, the witness has deposed that after the incident he gave statement regarding the incident before the learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kamalpur and after recording of the statement, the statement was read over to him and he put his signature in the said statement. On identification of the statement it was marked as Exbt.3 and the signature of the witness in the said statement was marked as Exbt. 3(1). In the cross-examination PW-2 further stated that there was no electric light at the place of occurrence. He also stated that many people use the road to go to the market where the incident took place.

[15] PW-3, Shri Nilmani Sabdakar, in his deposition has stated that the deceased was his brother and he was killed about nine months ago. On 29.03.2018 at around 8.00pm he made a call to his deceased brother on his mobile, but the phone was received by his friend Julu Deb who told that the

accused Haradhan Sabdakar killed his brother at ONGC Chowmuhani of Sabdakar Para. Thereafter, he rushed to the P.O and after sometime, his parents also came there. He also deposed that he found the dead body of his deceased brother lying at the spot with bleeding injury on his head. He has further stated that the subsequently, police came and shifted the dead body to the District Hospital, Kulai. He has submitted that earlier also the accused assaulted his father and deceased brother.

[16] PW-4, Shri Dipak Sabdakar, in his evidence has stated that his house is located adjacent to the house of Shri Gopal Sabdakar, father of the deceased. He has stated that on hearing the news he went to the P.O. and came to know from the people gathered at the spot that the accused Shri Haradhan Sabdakar killed Gunamani by striking him with an axe and the dead body was already shifted to the hospital. He also deposed that the police seized one axe found by the side of the drain located at a short distance from the P.O. wherein in put his signature as witness. On identification the signature of the witness in the seizure list regarding seizure of axe was marked as Exbt.4. and the axe was marked as Exbt.MO.2. He further deposed that the police also seized one bi- cycle and one chappal from the P.O. by preparing another seizure list. On identification the signature of the witness in the seizure list was marked as Exbt.5. Seized chappal and bi-cycle belong to the deceased which were marked as Exbt.MO.3 and Exbt.MO.4 respectively.

[17] PW-5 Shri Sunil Datta in his evidence has deposed that the deceased was known to him and he was killed about 9/10 months ago at ONGC Chowmuhani of Sabdakar Para. He also stated in the same tune as that of the PW-2 and PW-3.

[18] PW-6, Shri Subhadeep Saha, learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kamalpur, in his examination-in-chief deposed that on 13.03.2018 the investigating officer of the case produced two witnesses, namely, Shri Bikramjit Deb and Shri Ramik Sabdakar before him for recording their statement under Section-164(5) of the Cr. P.C. PW-6 further deposed that Shri Bikramjit Deb was minor and after preliminary test the witness being found

competent and recorded his statement as per his version. After recording the statement, he read over the contents of the statement to the witness and thereafter issued certificate at the bottom of the statement which was marked as Exbt.6. The certificate along with signature of the witness in the statement was marked as Exbt.6 (1). He has further stated that Shri Ramik Sabdakar was also a minor the due process was followed for recording his statement as per his version and it was marked as Exbt.3(2).

[19] PW-7, Shri Bimal Sabdakar in his examination-in-chief deposed that the deceased was his nephew i.e. son of his sister who was murdered about 8/9 months ago at ONGC Chowmuhani of Sabdakar Para. He has stated that at the time of occurrence he was in his house which is at a distance of 30 minutes walking distance from the P.O. After hearing hue and cry he went there and at the P.O. he came to know from the mother of the deceased that accused Haradhan Sabdakar killed her son.

[20] PW-8 Shri Bijoy Sabdakar in his evidence has stated that the deceased was his cousin brother who was murdered about nine months ago. He has deposed that after hearing the incident he went to the P.O. but, the dead body has already been shifted to the hospital by the police. He has stated that the weapon of murder was seized by the police having blood stained and by preparing seizure list he put his signature in the said seizure list which was marked as Exbt.4(1).

[21] PW-9, Smt. Monic Debbarma, Sr. Scientific Officer, State Forensic Science Laboratory, Narsinharh in her evidence has stated that on 13.04.2018 their office received two numbers of sealed packets in connection with Ambassa P.O. Case No.2018/SBS/014, dated 29.03.2018 under Section- 302 of IPC which was forwarded from the office of the Sub-Divisional Police officer, Ambassa vide memo No.1438/SDPO/ABS/DLI/18, dated 12.04.2018. She deposed that there were two boxes and box No.2 was forwarded to the Bio/Sero Division for examination and opinion as per requisition of the investigating officer. She further deposed that box No.1 retained in the toxicology division and it was in hard paper box, covered with white cloth,

sealed with wax seal impressions of SDPO, Ambassa and it tallies with that of the forwarded specimen seal and on the packet case reference and other particulars were written along with seal and signature of the forwarding authority which was marked in the laboratory as TOX/73/18(1).

[22] PW-9 deposed regarding results of chemical examination which is as follows:

"The exhibits were suitably extracted and analyzed by colour tests and chromatographic method. TOX/73/18 (B and D): Negative for the presence of common organophosphorous, organochloro, carbamates, pyrethroids group of pesticides, benzodiazepines, barbiturates group of drugs and ethyl alcohol. TXO/73/18(C): Not examined since it is not suitable for detection of common poisons." Report of Bio/Sero division was attached in original and on identification the report prepared by PW-9 was marked as Exbt.7.

[23] PW-10, Dr. Pradyut Kanti Debbarma, Medial Officer of Dhalai District Hospital, Kulai in his evidence stated that on 30.03.2018 he along with Dr. Jatileshwar Debbarma and Dr. Manash Gope of Dhalai District Hospital conducted post mortem examination on the body of deceased. During post mortem examination they observed the following external injuries on the body of the deceased thus, Lacerated wound, fresh in nature (4x2x1.5)cm on occipital region, lacerated wound, fresh in nature (3x2x1.5)cm, with irregular margin over occipital region, lacerated wound, fresh in nature (2x2x1.5)cm with irregular margin of left occipital area, lacerated wound, fresh in nature (4x2x1.5)cm over right occipital area, Abrasion, fresh in nature (4x0.5x3)cm over T10 to T12 area and Huge clotted blood surrounding occipital lobe of brain is seen.

[24] PW-10 also deposed that the cause of death was due to haemorrhagic shock due to severe haemorrhage in brain followed by blunt trauma over occipital region of the head. He further deposed that they preserved the viscera and clotted blood which was subsequently sent for forensic analysis. He also deposed that time since death was 12-24 hours approximately assessed from rigor mortis. On identification the post mortem

report was marked as Exbt.8 and the injuries observed on the body of the deceased could be possible with the axe (Exbt.MO.2). Nothing incriminating came out in his cross-examination.

[25] PW-11, the investigating officer in his evidence has stated that on 29.03.2018 at around 8-50pm a telephonic information was received from an unknown person that hue and cry was going on at Sabdakar para and it was also informed that one male person of Sabdakar para was brutally assaulted and lying nearby the road at Sabdakar para and accordingly, the information was entered in the GD book vide No.24, dated 29.03.2018 which on identification was marked as Exbt.9. Subsequently, he along with other police staffs rushed to the spot to verify the information. The extract of the GD entry, on identification was marked as Exbt.10. He further deposed that on going there they found one Gunamani Sabdakar lying on the agricultural field nearby the road at Sabdakar para with multiple head injuries in senseless condition and they he with the help of staff and relative of the injured shifted him to the Dhalai District Hospital, Kulai and the attending doctor namely, Dr. Niladri Debbarma declared him brought dead. Thereafter, as per instruction of the officer-in-charge he conducted inquest over the dead body of the deceased and in course of inquest he observed bleeding injury on the forehead of the deceased, back side of his head and on his back. On identification the inquest report prepared by PW-11 in presence of the witnesses was marked as Exbt.11. PW-1 further contended that from the preliminary inquiry during preparation of inquest report it was revealed that the cause of death was due to sustaining of severe injury. After completion of preparation of the inquest report, he sent the dead body to the Dhalai District Hospital morgue for post mortem examination. On identification the dead body challan was marked as Exbt.12.

[26] He has further stated that on the following day after post mortem examination, he seized the body organs of deceased collected by the Medical Officer in course of post mortem examination and the wearing apparels of the deceased viz. one full sleeve shirt, one banion and one full jeans pant by preparing a seizure list. On identification the seizure list prepared by him in

respect of seizure of body organs of the deceased and his wearing apparels was marked as Exbt.13.

[27] PW-12, Shri Bikramjit Deb @ Julu is another friend of the deceased and one of the eye witnesses to the occurrence and he deposed that his friend was murdered about one year ago at ONGC Chowmuhani on 29.03.2018. On that day he along with deceased went to Kulai Bazar and there deceased made recharge of his mobile sim and after recharge they came to the chowmuhani where they met with their friend Shri Ramik Sabdakar @ Viki and started gossiping sitting on the side of the road. He has stated that suddenly the accused Haradhan Sabdakar came to the spot and stood behind them, but subsequently, he left the said place. He also deposed that after 15/20 minutes he again came there and struck on the head of Gunamani Sabdakar with an Axe and as a result, Gunamani became senseless. Out of fear Romik stood up and came back at a distance of 6/7 cubits and at that time when accused chased them, PW-12 ran away to his house, but did not find any one in his house. He also deposed that again he came back and saw the accused Haradhan Sabdakar standing in front of his house armed with blood stained Axe and he asked him not to disclose the incident to anybody and tried to influence him saying that he would give him money and the accused threw the Axe to the drain on the side of his house.

[28] During cross-examination PW-12 stated that the incident took place in between 7.30pm to 8.00pm which he stated to the learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kamalpur. He also averred to the investigating officer that the accused tried to influence him by giving money for not disclosing the incident to anyone. He further stated that he had no enmity with the accused, the appellant herein.

[29] PW-13, Himadri Sarkar, SI, he has stated in his evidence that on 29.03.2018 at 8.08pm a telephonic information was received in the police station to the effect that there was an incident at Sabdakar para. He also deposed that the said information was entered as GD vide No.24, dated 29.03.2018 and he accompanied by SI Shri Dilip Sarkar, SI Shri Sanjib

Debbarma and other staff of the police station rushed to the spot. Thereafter, getting all other information, he gave instructions to SI Sanjib Debbarma to take legal steps regarding the incident and by that he was informed that the victim was declared dead by the doctor. Thereafter, one Gopal Sabdakar lodged oral ejahar to him which he reduced into writing as per his version. On identification the ejahar, marked as Exbt.1 (1) and endorsement and signature of PW-13 on the body of the ejahar was marked as Exbt.1(2).

[30] During cross-examination, he deposed that he could not remember now whether the witness Shri Romik Sabdakar was present when he reduced into writing the ejahar given by Shri Gopal Sabdakar, but he could remember that the witness Khoka Sabdakar was present at that time.

[31] PW-14, Shri Sanjib Debbarma, the investigating officer of the case in his evidence deposed that on 29.03.2018 on the basis of a telephonic information received in the police station he accompanied by officer-in-charge of the police station and SI Shri Dilip Sarkar with other police staff went to the Sabdakar para to verify the information regarding an incident taken place there. He deposed that many villagers assembled there and there they found one person namely, Gunamani Sabdakar lying unconscious with bleeding injury on the side of the road. He further stated that the injured was immediately shifted to the Dhalai District Hospital with the help of police vehicle. Thereafter, he has taken necessary legal steps regarding the incident and he was informed by the people gathered at the P.O. that the accused Haradhan Sabdakar was detained by the villagers who allegedly committed the offence. He thereafter found the accused Haradhan Sabdakar was also sustained some injuries due to assault by the public and so, he shifted the accused to the Dhalai District Hospital with escort. Thereafter, by preparing seizure list containing one green colour hawai chappal, one Hercules brand bi-cycle and clotted blood in gauge curtain were located. On identification the seizure list was marked as Exbt.5(2).

[32] On the basis of the version of Bikramjit Deb @ Julu the axe by which the accused committed the offence, recovered the axe having slight

blood stain from the side of the house of witness Bikramjit Deb @ Julu and seized the same by preparing seizure list marked as Exbt.4(2). Thereafter, he arranged for recording of the statement of the witness under Section-161 of the Cr. P.C. and from the statement of Shri Bikramjit Deb @ Julu and Romik Sabdakar he came to know that at the time of occurrence they were enjoying mobile and the mobile of deceased was with Shri Romik Sabdakar and accordingly, he seized the mobile set of the deceased as produced by Shri Romik Sabdakar. Thereafter, he also examined two other witnesses and recorded their statement under Section-161 Cr. P.C. In the meantime, he got information that the victim declared brought dead from the District Hospital.

[33] He has further stated that on 30.03.2018 he again visited the P.O. and prepared the hand sketch map and index of the place of occurrence from where the dead body was recovered which on identification marked as Exbt.15 and Exbt.16 respectively. He has further stated that on 31.03.2018 he sent Romik Sabdakar and Bikramjit Deb to the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate for recording their statement under Section-164(5) of Cr. P.C. On that day he also examined four witnesses and recorded their statement under Section-161 Cr. P.C. and on 12.04.2018 he received the post mortem report of the deceased and came to know the cause of death. He received the SCD from SI Dilip Sarkar in connection with shifting of the victim in the hospital and post mortem examination of the deceased. On completion of the investigation, prima facie case being made out against the accused Haradhan Sabdakar he submitted charge-sheet against the accused under Sections- 302/201/506 of IPC vide Ambassa P.S. charge sheet No.21 of 2018 dated 25.06.2018. The witnesses identified the accused in the dock of the Court.

[34] During cross-examination PW-14 has deposed that the relationship between the accused and the deceased was uncle and nephew. He further deposed that it was revealed from his investigation that there was land dispute in between the family of deceased and the accused. He also deposed that previously there was no other case against the accused in relation to the land dispute.

[35] This Court has given its conscious thought over the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and also perused the relevant evidence on record. In this case PWs-2 and 12 are the two eye witnesses to the occurrence. PW-12 accompanied the deceased to kulai market on the fateful evening and after returning from the market when they reached at ONGC Chowmuhani, they met with PW-2 Shri Romik Sabdakar @ Viki and they started gossiping there sitting on the side of the road. Both of them in their evidence have stated that suddenly accused Haradhan Sabdakar appeared and struck blows on the head of the deceased by an axe as a result, Gunamani sustained severe injuries. On seeing the incident they tried to resist the accused but the accused threatened them with dire consequences. They further stated that after receiving the information, police came to the spot and shifted the victim to the hospital but subsequently, he was declared dead. The villagers detained the accused Haradhan Sabdakar and later on the accused was handed over to the police. PW-3 also corroborated the evidence of PW-1. He in his evidence deposed that on receiving the information that Haradhan Sabdakar killed his brother he rushed to the place of occurrence and found the dead body of his deceased brother lying at the spot with bleeding injury on his head.

[36] From the evidence of PW-6, it reveals that on 13.03.2018 two numbers of witnesses were produced before him for recording their statement under Section-164(5) of Cr. P.C. From the evidence of PWs-2 and 12 it reveals that they gave their statements before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kamalpur which has corroborated the total episode.

[37] Now, coming to the evidence of PW-10 Dr. Pradyut Kanti Debbarma. From this evidence it reveals that the cause of death was due to haemorrhagic shock due to severe haemorrhage in brain followed by blunt trauma over occipital region of the head. He also deposed that time since death was 12-24 hours approximately assessed from rigor mortis. PW-10 in his evidence further deposed that the injuries observed on the body of the deceased could be possible with the axe (Exbt.MO.2) produced in the Court. It also reveals from the evidence of PW-11 SI Dilip Sarkar that the cause of death was due to sustaining of severe injury.

[38] From the evidence of PW-4 it reveals that the police seized one axe found by the side of the drain located at a short distance from the place of occurrence by preparing a seizure list and he put his signature in the said seizure list (Exbt.4). PW-4 also identified the axe in the Court (Exbt.5). According to PW-7 after receiving the information police came to the P.O. and seized blood stained oil, bi-cycle, chappal and an axe. PW-12 has stated that he saw the accused conceal the axe by which he committed the offence and accordingly, he recovered the said axe having slight blood stain from the side of the house of the witness Shri Bikramjit Deb @ Julu.

[39] Regarding motive of commission of the crime, as argued by the counsel for the appellant that there was land dispute in between the family of the deceased and the accused and the previous enmity could be the motive for murder. In this regard the evidence of PW-1, the father of the deceased stated that there was land dispute in between their family and the accused. PW-3 in his deposition stated that the accused had dispute with his father and earlier also accused tried to assault his father and deceased brother. One Panchayet meeting held to solve the dispute and as a member of the Panchayet he remained present in the salishi meeting. He also deposed that though the matter was settled, but the accused disobeyed the decision of the salishi. So, from the evidence of PW-3 it reveals that prior to the incident accused Haradhan Sabdakar tried to assault his father and deceased brother.

[40] From the evidence on record, it is crystal clear that the offence of murder of Gunamani Sabdakar allegedly committed by the accused on 29.03.2018, is not the first attempt of the accused. It is clear from the evidence of PW-4 that the land dispute between them was settled in Panchayet salishi meeting and being the member of the Panchayet he was present there, but subsequently, the accused disobeyed the settlement and prior to the incident, the accused tried to assault the deceased and his father.

[41] From the evidence it was not clear as to whether the accused came to the place of occurrence at the first round with an axe or not, but at the second round, he appeared there with an axe and gave a blow with the axe on

the head of the deceased which caused death of the deceased. This evidence discloses that the accused caused injury with intention to cause death of the victim Gunamani Sabdakar, the deceased herein. It also clear that the accused knew that such bodily injury by an axe would definitely cause death. The axe which was used by the accused was discovered by the police from a drain with blood stain. This evidence, thus, makes it clear that the accused did cause death of the deceased with an intention to cause death punishable under Section-302 of the IPC.

[42] Now, another question is as to whether the accused tried to conceal the axe or tried to arrange disappearance of evidence of screen himself from the punishment. The evidence of PW-12 says that after the incident the accused chased him and threatened for dire consequence if any disclosure was made to anybody. Also it appears that the accused allured him to pay money if no disclosure was made to anybody. It appears that the axe was recovered by the police on being shown by the PW-12 from a road side drain where the axe was concealed by the accused. That the axe was concealed by the accused, but recovered b y the police was disclosed from the evidence of PW-11 and PW-

14. It is clear that the accused tried to arrange disappearance of the evidence to save him, but ultimately caught red handed by the villagers and handed over to the police.

[43] In our ultimate analysis and having regard to the evidences on record, it is crystal clear that there is no reason as to why the continuity of the chain of evidences and the complaint made against the accused-appellant to be disbelieved. All the witnesses supported the entire case with regard to the commission of offence by the accused- person. Hence, the conviction and sentence as held by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhalai Judicial District, Ambassa, in connection with S.T. (Type-1) 22 of 2018 against the accused-appellant, Shri Haradhan Sabdakar, stands affirmed.

[44] For the reasons stated above, we do not find any infirmity in the findings arrived at by the learned Sessions Judge while convicting and sentencing the accused-appellant. Accordingly, the judgment and order of conviction and sentence as declared by learned Sessions Judge is affirmed and upheld and thus, the present appeal preferred by the convict-appellant shall stand dismissed. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. Send down the LCRs forthwith.

          JUDGE                                                      JUDGE




A.Ghosh