Tripura High Court
Shri Shyamal Nath @ Shyamal Debnath vs The State Of Tripura on 4 July, 2024
Author: Arindam Lodh
Bench: Arindam Lodh
Page 1 of 10
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
Crl. A(J) No.06 of 2023
Shri Shyamal Nath @ Shyamal Debnath
S/o: Shri Krishna Charan Nath
Of Vill. Rowa Chamtilla, P.S.:- Panisagar,
District:- North Tripura.
............... Appellant(s).
Versus
The State of Tripura
...............Respondent(s).
For Appellant(s) : Mr. S. Sarkar, Senior Advocate
(Ld. Legal Aid Counsel).
: Ms. V. Poddar, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raju Datta, P.P.
Date of Hearing : 02.05.2024
Date of Judgment : 04.07.2024
Whether fit for reporting : No
_B_E_ F_O_R_E_
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA
_J_ U_ D_ G_ M_E_N_T_
S. Datta Purkayastha, J.
The appeal arises from the judgment and sentence
dated 12.02.2020 passed by Ld. Sessions Judge, North Tripura,
Dharmanagar in S.T. (Type-1) 02 of 2019 whereby the appellant
was convicted under Section 302 of IPC and was sentenced to
suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of
Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further
rigorous imprisonment for 6(six) months.
[2] One Md. Katan Ali (PW-1) lodged the written "Ejahar"
on 21.08.2018 at 11:15 hours alleging inter alia, that on that day
at about 7:00 A.M. when his father Abdul Kadir (deceased) was
going to a nearby shop, the appellant Shyamal Debnath killed him
by causing „dao‟ blows in front of his house. Getting the
information from neighbouring people, he went there and found
the dead body of his father lying on the ground. It is also stated
that the mother of the appellant and his elder brother Kripesh Nath
(PW-2 and PW-8 respectively) informed them that the appellant
after causing death of the deceased fled away from the spot. The
police registered the case as Panisagar P.S. Case No.2018 PNS 040
under Section 302 of IPC and SI Gurupada Debnath (PW-15)
investigated the case and finally submitted the charge sheet under
Section 302 of IPC against the appellant.
[3] Ld. Trial Court framed the charge under Section 302 of
IPC against the appellant who denied the charge and thereafter,
prosecution examined total 19 witnesses.
[4] Mr. S. Sarkar, learned senior counsel argued that
prosecution case rested mainly on the evidence of the mother of
the appellant who was produced as an eye witness by the
prosecution, but she was not a trustworthy witness, for, according
to evidence of some witnesses they learnt the incident from the
mother of the appellant who had stated that her son had
committed murder of the deceased, but when the information was
given to the police first by the co-villager, no such name of
appellant was disclosed to the police at the first instance and
according to Mr. Sarkar, learned Sr. Counsel, a strong suspicion,
therefore, existed in this respect.
[5] Mr. Sarkar, learned Sr. Counsel also argued that some
of the witnesses had stated about one incident of previous day
alleging that the appellant gave threat to the deceased but no
intimation regarding said threat was given to the police. Mr.
Sarkar, learned Sr. Counsel also continued his argument
submitting that motive of the crime was also not established in this
case and the prosecution witnesses also did not corroborate on
material points with each other, rendering their testimonies
untrustworthy.
[6] Mr. Sarkar, learned Sr. Counsel further argued that
recovery of weapon was doubtful as it was found in a Lunga
surrounded by bushes which was one kilometre away from the
place of occurrence, but Ld. Trial Court lost sight of the said fact.
According to Mr. Sarkar, learned Sr. Counsel, the prosecution
could not prove the circumstances to form a complete chain for
holding the appellant guilty of the offence. The last submission as
made by Mr. Sarkar, learned Sr. Counsel was that in case, the
convictions and sentence are upheld by this Court, at least some
observations may be given, so that the appellant is released from
jail after completion of 14 years of his sentence.
[7] Mr. Raju Datta, learned P.P., on the other hand, with all
emphasis submitted that the mother of the appellant-convict and
his brother i.e. PW-2 and PW-8 were the key witnesses of the
incident who categorically implicated the appellant in commission
of murder of the deceased and there was no ground to disbelieve
them. According to him, other relevant witnesses such as PW-4,
PW-5, PW-6, PW-9, PW-10 and PW-12 were also very reliable
witnesses who supported the prosecution version and there was no
reason to disbelieve them. Next point, Mr. Datta, learned P.P.
argued, was that the scientific officer while examining the weapon
of offence found blood of the deceased in the said weapon („dao‟)
which sufficiently implicated the appellant in commission of alleged
crime beyond all reasonable shadow of doubt. Therefore, according
to learned P.P., Ld. Trial Court was completely justified in
convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 302 of IPC.
[8] We have given our thoughtful consideration to the
submission of learned counsel of both sides and also gone through
the record thoroughly. The key witness of the incident is the
mother of the appellant Smt. Sribashini Nath (PW-2) who
categorically stated that about 6/7 months back on 4th of Bhadra
at about 7:00 / 7:30 A.M. in the morning she was in her home and
found her son Shyamal Nath was talking with the deceased in front
of their house and all on a sudden, Shyamal inflicted „dao‟ blows
on the deceased, as a result of which he fell down with grievous
injuries on the ground and died on the spot. She, thereafter,
raised alarm and started crying. She also identified the appellant in
the court. The Judicial Magistrate recorded her statement on
production by police before him. She could not be discredited in
her cross-examination by the defence.
[9] Shri Kripesh Nath (PW-8 ) the brother of the appellant
also in similar tune stated that on that day, hearing alarm raised
by his mother, he came out from the house and found his brother
Shyamal Nath was going towards western side of their house with
a „dao‟ in his hand and he inflicted „dao‟ blows on the deceased in
front of their house. In his cross-examination, he admitted that he
did not see his brother to inflict such „dao‟ blow. However, his
other part of evidence that he found the appellant running with a
„dao‟ in his hand just after the incident could not be shaken by the
defence.
[ 10 ] The son of the deceased namely Md. Katan Ali (PW-1),
the informant of the case, stated that on 21.08.2018 hearing
alarm from the western side of their house he rushed to the place
and found his father was lying in injured condition nearby the
house of Krishna Charan Nath (father of the appellant) and the
mother and brother of appellant had reported him that the
appellant caused hurt to his father with a sharp weapon causing
severe injuries on him. According to him, after a while the police
came and prepared inquest report and shifted the dead body to
the hospital and on the same date, he lodged the FIR at Panisagar
PS. He was a witness of inquest. In his cross-examination, he
stated that probably within 10 to 15 minutes after his father went
out of the house, the incident occurred and the police came to the
spot after half an hour of the incident. His evidence that from
mother and brother of the appellant, he came to know about the
incident was found absent in his previous statement recorded
under Section 161 Cr.PC. Anyway, he is not an eye witness of this
case.
[ 11 ] Sri Swapan Debnath(PW-4) deposed that getting the
information from the villagers that one person was murdered in
their village nearby the house of the appellant, he went there and
found the dead body of Abdul Kadir lying there. According him, the
mother of the appellant was shouting with cry that her son
Shyamal Nath had murdered Abdul Kadir and he also found cut
injury on the neck and other portion of the body of the deceased.
He further stated that the mother of the appellant had told him
and other persons who gathered there that Shyamal Nath fled
away with a „dao‟ by which he committed murder and thereafter,
the police officials with the help of villagers including himself
searched Shyamal Nath and finally found him in the jungle nearby
his (PW-4) house along with „dao‟ in his hand and thereafter,
police seized said „dao‟ and arrested him. Similar has been the
version of Anil Nath (PW-5) another co-villager. None of them
could substantially be discredited by defence in their cross-
examination. The Investigating Officer (PW-15) in his evidence
also corroborated with above said two witnesses that from the
statement of the mother of the appellant it was found that the
appellant after inflicting „dao‟ blows on the deceased ran away and
thereafter he with the help of the local people made search of the
appellant and found him with „dao‟ in his hand stained with blood
and accordingly, he arrested the appellant and seized the „dao‟
from his possession in presence of witnesses. Except some denials,
no cross-examination was done to the Investigating Officer on that
point. The seizure list Exbt.5/2 dated 21.08.2018 regarding seizure
of said „dao‟ shows that said „dao‟ was seized from a place called
Chamtilla in Rowa area in a lunga surrounded by jungle behind the
house of one Swapan Debnath (PW-4) and it is also specifically
reflected in the said seizure list that said „dao‟ was recovered from
the present appellant. Therefore, above said fact of fleeing away
by the appellant and recovery of blood stained „dao‟ was fully
established by the evidence of PW-4, PW-5 and PW-15.
[ 12 ] Another son of the deceased namely, Salam Uddin (PW-
12) stated in his evidence that hearing information from his
brother he went to the spot and found the dead body of his father
lying in front of the house of the appellant with grievous injuries
and there, the mother of the appellant reported to them crying
that the appellant had murdered his father. He also stated that on
the previous evening, his father had reported to them that on that
day while he was going for tethering his cattle, the appellant
abused him to teach him lesson as their goats destroyed his
vegetable garden and Moin Uddin (PW-9) and Nirab Shil (PW-6)
also witnessed the same. Though his such evidence was not found
in his previous statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.,
but both Nirab Shil (PW-6) and Moin Uddin (PW-9) stated in their
evidence said fact that when they were working in the garden of
one Siraj Uddin, the deceased was passing thereby and meanwhile
the appellant was found abusing the deceased alleging about
destruction of his vegetables by the goats of the deceased and at
that time having armed with one lathi the appellant had also
warned him that he would teach him a lesson. They could also not
be discredited in their said portion of evidences.
[ 13 ] Head Constable Keshab Deb (PW-3) and Sri Mintu
Ranjan Paul (PW-18) deposed that in their presence the
Investigating Officer seized one gauged cloth in front of the house
of the appellant which was stained with blood and they accordingly
signed in the seizure list. PW-15 (Investigating Officer) stated that
he had seized blood sample of deceased from the spot side
Exbt.4/1. According to SI Samir Kanti Das (PW-14), on the said
date of incident he also accompanied the OC of the police station
and Investigating Officer to the spot and as per instruction of the
OC of the police station he prepared the inquest report (Exbt.1/2),
the dead body challan (Exbt.7) and also seized wearing apparels of
the deceased at Panisagar CHC morgue complex in presence of
witnesses under seizure list dated 21.08.2018 (Exbt.8). According
to the Investigating Officer (PW-15), on 28.08.2018, he sent the
blood sample of the deceased and the wearing apparels and the
seized „dao‟ to the State Forensic Science Laboratory (Narsingar)
for expert opinion and he received the report of the forensic lab on
10.10.2018. The said report of forensic lab (Exbt.13) and evidence
of Dr. Shabyasachi Nath (PW-17), Scientific Officer of the forensic
laboratory show that blood stain of human origin was detected in
all the said Exbts. marked as „A‟ „B‟ „C‟ „D‟ „E‟ and „F‟ and the
blood group "A". Therefore, from such evidence, it is also proved
that the blood which was found on the „dao‟ while arresting the
appellant was similar to the blood group of the deceased which
further adds the chain link to the commission of crime by the
appellant.
[ 14 ] Dr. Sandip Deb (PW-19) who did the autopsy on the
corpse of the deceased stated that he found a sharp cut injury
measuring about 20 x 10 x 6 cms. over right cheek and right side
of neck from 2 cms. lateral to right angle of mouth upto medial
border of right sternocleidomastoid muscle lying obliquely cutting
through great vessels, nerves, muscles and all the vital structures
of neck and cut injury involving tips of index, middle and ring
finger of right hand. According to the said autopsy surgeon, the
injuries were fresh in nature and time since death was 6 hours and
finally, he opined that cause of death was due to severe
hemorrhage as a result to damage of vital structure, vessels,
nerves around the neck which was homicidal in nature.
[ 15 ] All the above said evidences as discussed above
sufficiently establish that the appellant was responsible for the
murder of the deceased and therefore, Ld. Trial Court was justified
in convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 302 of
IPC which does not call for any interference.
[ 16 ] So far the submission of Mr. Sarkar, learned Sr.
Counsel regarding suffering of maximum sentence for 14 years in
case of life imprisonment is concerned, the power of remission or
commutation are the prerogative of the appropriate Government in
view of the provision of Section 432, 433 and 433-A of the CrPC
and this Court is not inclined to make any comment or observation
in this respect by influencing or abridging the exercise of such
power by the appropriate Government. It will always be opened to
such appropriate Government to consider the matter of such
remission or commutation of sentence in accordance with law.
In view of discussion above the appeal is found to be devoid
of merit and accordingly the same is dismissed.
Return the LCRs with a copy of this judgment.
Interim application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
(S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA, J) (ARINDAM LODH, J)
SATABDI Digitally signed by SATABDI
DUTTA
DUTTA Date: 2024.07.09 17:05:54
+05'30'
Riki
