Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

10. The next witness examined was Smt. Sugi Garh, PW2 who is the wife of the deceased Phulsai Garh. She deposed before the Court in the same line as mentioned in the F.I.R.

PW2, in her deposition narrated the incident and about the assault of the deceased and her sister-in-law. She stated that the incident took place at around 6 P.M. on the day of occurrence during the Durga Puja festival. She stated that she along with her husband Phulsai Garh and sister Manmotia had gone to Diju Tea Estate to take part in the Durga Puja festival whereupon the accused persons intercepted them and hacked them with pruning knife. She stated that they hacked her husband's neck and face and inflicted cut wounds to her sister Manmotia's neck and face. At that time, her brother-in-law, i.e. the younger brother of her husband (Mangal) came there and enquired as to who had inflicted the cuts on them, the accused also assaulted him on his head and neck. PW2 stated that Phulsai Garh and Gakul had hacked her husband and also Manmotia. She also stated that other two accused were also present along with these two accused persons. PW2 stated that seeing the occurrence she ran away from there so that they could not inflict any injury to her. She stated Page No.# 6/28 that her husband died on the spot later on. Thereafter, she lodged the ejahar.

PW3 was duly cross-examined on behalf of the accused Ramjesh, Badal and Gakul and denied the suggestion that he has stated before the police that he had gone to enjoy the Durga Puja festivities along with his elder sister and elder brother only. He also denied the suggestion made by the accused that he did not make the statement as referred above before the police. He also denied the suggestion made by the accused Phulsai Garh that after consuming liquor, he went along with his elder sister, elder brother and sister-in-law to enjoy the Durga Puja festivities. He sustained the injuries after they fell down.

15. The next witness examined was Lakhi Charan Garh, PW7. Though he was the nephew of the said deceased Phulsai Garh, he was in his house to attend the Durga Puja celebrations and did not know anything about the incident.

16. The next witness examined was Md. Bodirul Hoque, PW8, who was the in-charge of Silonibari Police Out post, stated that upon receipt of ejahar from the complainant Smt. Sugi Garh, he made the GD Entry and forwarded the ejahar to Officer-in-charge of North Lakhimpur Police Station for registering a case. He visited the place of occurrence, did the Page No.# 8/28 needful by preparing the sketch map and also conducting the enquiries and preparing the inquest report and sent the dead body for post-mortem report. He also stated that he seized a pruning knife from the place of occurrence which was exhibited as Ext.1. He conducted the investigation and on completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted by one Girish Ch. Nath, S.I. During the cross-examination on behalf of accused Gakul, Badal and Ramjesh Garh, PW8 stated that PW1 Manmotia Garh did not state before him that accused Gakul had cut her. Similarly, he also stated that PW2 Sugi Garh did not state before him that at the time of occurrence she went to attend the Durga Puja celebration with her husband and Manmotia Similarly, PW8 stated that PW3, Mangalsai Garh did not state him that during the investigation that he went to enjoy the puja festivities with his brother and sister and that the accused Phulsai called the other accused persons and inflicted cut injuries on them. He also stated that since darkness had descended at the time, things were not clearly visible.

24. Apart from the aforesaid lack of clarity as to the real intention for committing the offence which could not be brought out clearly by the prosecution, the prosecution witnesses have not consistent, in fact, have been contradictory in vital areas.

25. It has been submitted that while the deceased and his sister, said witnesses PW1 and PW3 were going to Diju Tea Estate to take part in the Durga Puja celebrations, the accused persons have inflicted cuts on them with dao and axe etc. inside the line. Thus, by the said evidence only three persons who were allegedly assaulted, however, the number of people assaulted was increased to four on so called eye witness count is to be considered i.e. Mangala Garh or Mangalsai Garh who stated in his deposition that his elder brother Phulsai Garh, sister-in-law Sugi Garh and his sister Manmotia and the said Mangalsai were going to enjoy the Durga Puja celebration when the incident occurred.