Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 103 (GAU)

Amar Singh Chetri v. State of Assam

2011-02-07

C.R.SARMA, MADAN B.LOKUR

body2011
JUDGMENT Madan B. Lokur, J. 1. The Appellant is aggrieved by his conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hailakandi in Sessions Case No. 26/2006 decided on 9-1-2007. 2. The case began with the lodging of a First Information Report (FIR) dated 9-12-2005. In his FIR the complainant says that at about 7.30 p.m. the Appellant inflicted cut blows on different parts of the body of his wife with a dao. It seems that the Appellant and his wife had some disputes relating to some household affairs and that is why the injuries were inflicted. While being taken to Katlichera hospital, the wife of the Appellant died as a result of the injuries. 3. The Investigating Officer filed his final report and charged the Appellant of having committed the murder of his wife Smti Rita Singh Chetri at his house. By an order dated 10-5-2006 the Magistrate committed the matter to the Sessions Court, where the Appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. The prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses while the Appellant did not examine any witness at all. 5. PW-1 Jagannath Singh Chetri is the elder brother of the Appellant while PW-2 Chandu Singh is the nephew of the Appellant. Both of them stated that they heard some hue and cry from the Appellant's house and so they rushed over. They saw the wife of the Appellant lying on the ground in a pool of blood and some injuries. The Appellant was standing by her side with a bothi dao in one hand and his child on his lap. When they tried to approach the Appellant, he threatened them with the bothi dao and asked them not to proceed any further otherwise he would injure them. 6. These two witnesses also say that in the meanwhile a complaint was made to the police and after they arrived, they managed to take away the bothi dao from the Appellant. 7. At this stage it may be mentioned that the bothi dao is not a weapon of offence but is used for cutting fish and other domestic purposes. 8. When news of the incident came to be known in the village, a large number of people gathered there, including PW-3 Johar Lal Bin, PW-4 Keshab Singh Chetri, PW-5 Devi Singh Chetri and PW-6 Amir Singh @ Amar Singh. 8. When news of the incident came to be known in the village, a large number of people gathered there, including PW-3 Johar Lal Bin, PW-4 Keshab Singh Chetri, PW-5 Devi Singh Chetri and PW-6 Amir Singh @ Amar Singh. When they entered the witness box, they substantiated the version given by PW-1 and PW-2 that they saw the Appellant beside the injured body of his wife and with a child in his lap. 9. While PW-3 Johar Lal Bin exaggerates the events when says that he saw the Appellant inflicting blows on the body of his wife. This is obviously not correct because the first two persons at the scene of occurrence, that is, PW-1 and PW-2 do not say any such thing. PW-3 Johar Lal Bin also says that even after the arrival of the police the Appellant continued to threaten them and asked them not to proceed towards him. To an extent, this is confirmed by PW-6 Amir Singh who says that the Appellant threatened to kill the baby, if they tried to snatch the bothi dao away from him. 10. However, what is common to the statement of all the witnesses is that the Appellant was beside the injured body of his wife and had a bothi dao with him and a baby on his lap. 11. The post mortem report submitted by PW-7 Dr K.Z. Choudhury shows that there were a large number of wounds inflicted on the body of the Appellant's wife. The wounds are described as follows: 1. One incised wound of size 8.5 cm x 5.2 cm x 6 cm is seen on the medial aspect and front of the right forearm just above the right wrist running obliquely and cutting the right ulna bone. 2. One incised wound of size 1cm x 1 cm x 0.4 cm is seen on the medial aspect of the middle of the right ring finger running transversely. 3. One incised wound of size 1.2cm x 1.1cm x 0.6cm is seen on the medial aspect of the proximal phalanx of the right little finger cutting and dividing to phalanx transversely. 4. One incised wound of size 1cm x 0.5cm x 0.5cm is seen on the palm aspect of the left ring finger. 5. One incised wound of size 7.5cm x 3.3cm x 3cm is seen running transversely over the medial aspect of the left forearm. 6. 4. One incised wound of size 1cm x 0.5cm x 0.5cm is seen on the palm aspect of the left ring finger. 5. One incised wound of size 7.5cm x 3.3cm x 3cm is seen running transversely over the medial aspect of the left forearm. 6. One incised wound of size 16.4cm x 7.9cm x 9.8cm is seen running obliquely antero-posterior over the left shoulder cutting the upper part of the left humoral bone and separating shoulder joint and reaching the lower part of the left axilla. 7. One incised wound of size 7.3cm x 3.2cm x 3.8cm is seen running transversely over the left side of the neck. 8. One incised wound of size 7.2cm x 2.8cm x 2.3cm is seen on the left side of the upper part of the neck. 9. One incised wound of size 4cm x 3cm x 2.3cm is seen on the left side of the chin. 10. One incised wound of size 5cm x 3cm x 2cm is seen running transversely over the lower part of the left arm. 11. One incised wound of size 5.3cm x 3.2cm x 2.4cm is seen running transversely over the deltoid region of the left arm. 12. Four numbers of incised wounds each averaging about 2cm x 1cm x 1cm are seen on the lateral aspect of the left arm. According to this witness the death of the Appellant's wife was due to massive hemorrhage following multiple grievous incised wounds caused by a sharp weapon. It is important to note that this witness was not cross examined. 12. It appears to us that even though there is no eye witness to the actual inflicting of blows or incised wounds on the person of the Appellant's wife, there is adequate evidence to leave no manner of doubt that in fact the Appellant had inflicted those blows on the body of his wife. All the witnesses say that the Appellant was beside the body of his wife which was lying in a pool of blood and had a large number of injuries. The Appellant was near the body with a baby in his lap and a bothi dao in his hand. It seems the baby was kept as a hostage to prevent anybody from coming near him and he had virtually to be "tricked" into giving up the bothi dao. The Appellant was near the body with a baby in his lap and a bothi dao in his hand. It seems the baby was kept as a hostage to prevent anybody from coming near him and he had virtually to be "tricked" into giving up the bothi dao. It is only thereafter that the Appellant could be arrested and investigations carried out. 13. There is no dispute about the weapon of offence which was in fact exhibited during the course of the trial. Considering the large number of injuries, it is clear that the assailant intended to kill the Appellant's wife. Given the evidence of all the witnesses, there is no doubt that the assailant was none other than the Appellant. 14. It is submitted by learned Amicus Curiae that the Appellant was provoked by his wife with regard to some household affairs. There is no such evidence except the bald statement of the informant in the FIR that there were some differences between the Appellant and his wife with regard to some household affairs. Even if differences did exist between the Appellant and his wife, they cannot be of such enormity as to result in the Appellant causing grievous injuries to his wife, ultimately leading to her death. 15. We find no merit in this appeal and it is accordingly dismissed. 16. For the assistance rendered by the learned Amicus Curiae, we direct the Assam State Legal Services Authority to remunerate him with a sum of Rs.5000/-. 17. Trial Court records be sent back immediately. Petition dismissed.