Gauhati High Court
Chand Mia vs State Of Assam on 6 February, 1990
Equivalent citations: 1990CRILJ2387
JUDGMENT S. Haque, J.
1. Accused Chand Mia was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to R.I. for life vide judgment dt. 11-1-1984 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Shri Purna Chandra Saikia of Nowgong in Sessions Case No. 91 (N-M) of 1981 arising out of G.R. Case No. 629 of 19/9 under Section 302 IPC of Morigaon Court.
2. Roisuddin (PW-2) lodged the First Information Report Ext. 1 at about 1 a.m. (midnight) of 2-9-79 stating that in the evening hour at about 6.30 p.m. of 1-9-79, the accused Chand Mia suddenly came out from hiding place near Lecherijan Bridge and caused death of Kitab AH by giving dagger blows while Kitab Ali was returning from Amlakhi village. Jalaluddin, Abdul Matleb and Md. Kandra were named as witnesses to the occurrences. Case was registered at Mikirbheta Police station and investigated into.
3. Dead body of Kitab ali was found lying at the place of occurrence near the bridge on the road, and Shri K. Bhattacharjee S.I. of Police (PW-7) held inquest over the body next morning i.e. on 2-9-79. Ext. 2 was the inquest report. Several cut injuries were seen over head, orbital region, abdomen, both shoulder and other parts of the body and intestines coming out through the cut. Death of Kitab alia at the evening time of 1-9-79 at the place of occurrence as a result of injuries sustained was not disputed. Dr. B. C. Kakoti held post mortem examination at Nowgong Civil Hospital and found the followings:--
1. One horizontal deep incised wound extending from one orbital cavity to the other side, 6" X 1/2" X deep to the base of the brain, incising both the eye balls and the underlying structures.
2. One incised wound on the right temporal region, 4" X 1/2" X bone deep.
3. Two incised wounds on the left and right deltoid regions each 3" X 1/2" X bone deep.
4. One oblique incised wound, 4" X 1/2" X peritonial cavity, on the left flank, through the rent of which intestinal coils were coming out.
5. One incised wound, 4" X 1/2" X muscle deep, on the left hypochondrium.
All the injuries were found to be antimortem and the doctor opined that the death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of injuries sustained. The doctor further opined that injury No. 1 was sufficient to cause death instanteniously and that injury No. 4 was also likely to cause death in ordinary course of nature. It was said that the injuries were caused by sharp cutting weapon and might be by the same or similar weapon. Considering the nature of the injuries, we agree and accept the opinions of the doctor. It was proved that Kitab Ali died on 1 -9-79 evening as a result of cut injuries.
4. The accused Chand Mia faced the trial for the charge under Section 302 IPC by pleading not guilty. Nine (9) witnesses including doctor and investigating Officer were examined by the prosecution. Learned Sessions Judge believed and relied on the evidence of 3 eye witnesses and held accused Chand Mia guilty for murder.
5. PW-2 Roisuddin is the informant. He heard in the village at about the evening time when sun was set but darkness had not descended, that Chand Mia had killed Kitab ali. He immediately came to the place of occurrence, saw the dead body and found Jalaluddin, Abdul Matlab and Kandra Seikh near the dead body. He could know from them that Chand Mia killed Kitab Ali by dealing dagger blows. He came to police station and lodged the FIR. He narrated the incident in the FIR whatever he heard from the witnesses at the place of occurrence.
6. PW. 3 Jalaluddin was an eye witness of the occurrence. Deceased Kitab Ali was his uncle (father's younger brother). On the day of occurrence he accompanied Kitab Ali to Amlakhi village. PW-6 Tarabanu, wife of Kitab Ali also corroborated that her husband had gone with Jalaluddin that day and did not return till evening. Jalaluddin deposed that while they were returning at dusk time, near the bridge, suddenly accused Chand Mia came out from behind the jute stick bundles with a dagger in hand and struck several blows on the person of Kitab Ali who fell on the water by the road side; Jalaluddin cried out shouting "Chand Mia has killed my uncle", but Chand Mia also chased after him, and in the meantime Kandra and Matleb (PW-4 and 5) came up from under the bridge and said 'Sabhadhan' to Chand Mia and then Chand Mia fled away. Then Jalaluddin with the help of Kandra and Matleb pulled out injured Kitab Ali from the water and placed him by the roadside, but Kitab Ali died instantenously. Jalal disclosed to Kandra and Matleb that Chand Mia assaulted and killed Kitab Ali. He was cross examined at great length but could not be shaken. No contradiction nor descripency could be shown in his evidence.
7. Both Kandra Seikh and Abdul Matlab (PW-4) have fully corroborated Jalaluddin. They are co-villagers of Kitab Ali and Chand Mia. Both of them were also eye witnesses of the occurrence. Both of them were coming on a boat from Roumari side towards the bridge, when they reached near the bridge, it was just at the sun set, but day light was there, they heard the cry and shouting "Chand Mia has killed my uncle", they immediately landed and came up by the side of the bridge and saw that Chand Mia chasing Jalaluddin with a dagger in hand, but Chand Mia fled away when they shouted 'Sabhadhan'. They could know immediately from Jalaluddin that Chand Mia had killed Kitab Ali by dealing dagger blows. They helped Jalal to pull out Kitab Ali from the road side water. Both the witnesses had been cross-examined at great length, but nothing could be shown to disbelieve or suspect their evidence. It was found from the evidence of Jalal. Kandra and Matlab that after a while Roisuddin came there and they reported the occurrence to him. Roisuddin immediately proceeded to the Police station and lodged the F.I.R. stating what he heard from them.
8. PW-6 Tarabanu deposed that her husband Kitab Ali went out with Jalaluddin at about noon time, but did not return home till evening, but at the evening time Roisuddin reported her that Chand Mia killed her husband. She went to the place of occurrence and saw the dead body and there at the place of occurrence she found Jalaluddin. She was declared hostile only because she resiled from her previous statement made before police about the fact of incident she heard from Jalaluddin. Declaring her hostile would not wash away her entire evidence. She corroborated prosecution case that Jalal accompanied her husband and that she heard from Raisuddin that Chand Mia killed her husband and that she found Jalal (PW-3) at the place of occurrence when she had gone to see the dead body.
9. Jalaluddin was with Kitab Ali while returning together. His cry and shouting 'Chand Mia has killed my uncle' was heard by Kandra Seikh and Matleb and they also saw Chand Mia chasing Jalal with a dagger. We have very carefully scrutinised the evidence of Jalal, Kandra and Matleb and find no reason to disbelieve them. They are found to be trustworthy and reliable witnesses. Jalaluddin was the eye witness of the attack and assault by Chand Mia on Kitab Ali and then Kandra and Matlab saw Chand Mia at the place of occurrence chasing Jalal with a dagger and fled away seeing them. The medical evidence have also corroborated Jalaluddin on the fact that injuries were caused by sharp cutting weapon 'dagger'. It was proved beyond doubt that accused Chand Mia caused death of Kitab Ali by dealing blows with sharp cutting weapon.
10. Mr. A. C. Bora for the appellant submits that Jalaluddin and Roisuddin are related to deceased Kitab Ali and so their evidence to be rejected being interested. It is now settled principle of law by series of Supreme Court decisions that relationship with victim is not a ground for disbelieving a witness. Ordinarily a close relative intends not to screen the real culprit as he is very much interested that the real culprit is brought to book. Close relationship with victim far from being a foundation for criticism of the evidence is often a sure guarantee of truth. The evidence of such a witness requires scrutiny more critically and carefully. The presence of a relative at the place of occurrence when probable his evidence as eye witness would not be disbelieved on flimsy pretext. When the evidence of an eye witness is corroborated by medical evidences, the witness should not be disbelieved or his evidences be looked with suspecion only because he happens to be related to the deceased. Jalaluddin accompanied Kitab Ali, he shouted when the assailant attacked his uncle Kitab Ali by uttering the name of the assailant 'Chand Mia' which was heard by the other 2 eye witnesses Kandra Sheikh and Matleb who also saw Chand Mia at the place of occurrence chasing Jalaluddin with a dagger. Roisuddin also met Jalaluddin, Kandra and Matleb at the place of occurrence immediately after the incident and heard the version of occurrence from them and narrated it in the First Information Report. The medical evidence fully corroborated the evidence of Jalaluddin that the assaults were given by sharp cutting weapon 'dagger'. There can be no reason to suspect the evidence of Jalaluddin. On careful scrutiny his evidence is found to be true and dependable.
11. Accused Chand Mia lived in the house of Kitab Ali since childhood, but separated after he got married. Kitab Ali adopted another child Maro Mia. Chand Mia had no land of his own. Chand Mia had forged a sale deed in respect of the land of Kitab Ali and for the same Kitab Ali filed a suit. All these were about 6 months prior to the occurrence. So, Chand Mia had committed the offence in order to get the land of Kittab Ali. After this occurrence, Chand Mia now sold the land and house of Kitab Ali to Mir Hussain. Now, Tarabanu widow of Kitab Ali is living with Chand Mia as she compromised the suit with him. All these facts are found from the evidence. So Chand Mia had motive to kill Kitab Ali.
12. Learned Sessions Judge had duly appreciated the evidence on record and justly found Chand Mia guilty under Section 302 IPC and appropriately sentenced him. There is nothing to interfere with the judgment and order of conviction.
13. This appeal is dismissed. Accused Chand Mia is directed to surrender immediately to serve out his sentence. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nowgong shall issue notice on the bailor to produce Chand Mia for sending him to jail.
W.A. Shishak, J.
14. I agree.