C.R. Sarma. J.— This appeal is directed against the judgment and order, dated 14.05.2007, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, (FTC), Tinsukia, in Sessions Case No. 25(T)/2006. 2. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 2302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 months. 3. The prosecution case is that, on 26.11.2005, at about 6 p.m., Sri Fuglu Gowala (hereinafter called the deceased) went out towards the tea garden. On the same evening the appellant also visited the house of the deceased and enquired, from the wife of the deceased, about the where about of her husband. The deceased did not return home during the said night and his dead body, with injuries, on his person, was found lying, on the next day, in section 4/5 of the tea garden, where he worked. On the fateful evening, at about 7-30 p.m., the appellant visited the house of Sri Riki Konwar (P W-10) and informed him that he had killed a person, namely, Fuglu with a dao and after making such disclosure the appellant requested P W-10 to assist him in surrendering before the police station. Accordingly the PW-10 took the appellant to the Talap P.S. in an Auto-Rickshaw. In the said police station, police seized a meat dao from the appellant. The informant, on the next morning, lodged an FIR with the O.C., Doom-Dooma P.S. and the same was registered under section 302 IPC. The informant initially approached the i/c of the Talap police station, As the place of occurrence fallen under the jurisdiction of Doom-Dooma P.S, the informant was sent from Talap P.S. to Doom-Dooma P.S. 4. During the course of investigation police visited the place of occurrence, seized the incriminating weapon vide ext. 1, prepared inquest report of the dead body, forwarded the same for post mortem examination and recorded the statement of witnesses. At the close of the investigation police suybmitted charge-sheet under Section 302 IPC. The charge was framed, under Section 302 IPC to which the appellant pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses. At the close of the evidence for the prosecution, the accused person was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied the allegations brought against him. The charge was framed, under Section 302 IPC to which the appellant pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses. At the close of the evidence for the prosecution, the accused person was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. He denied the allegations brought against him. In his statement, made under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the appellant, while pleading his innocence, stated that he did not make any extra-judicial confession, as alleged by the prosecution. Considering the evidence on record the learned Sessions Judge found the appellant guilty of offence, under Section 302 Cr.P.C. and accordingly convicted and sentenced him as indicated above. 5. We have heard Mrs. M.B. Bujarbaruah, learned Amicus Curiae and Mr. D. Das, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent. 6. The prosecution case is based on the extra-judicial confession, alleged to be made by the appellant before the witnesses and the circumstantial evidence that the appellant had surrendered before the police along with the incriminating weapon, which was seized from his possession. The motive behind the crime has been disclosed to be a quarrel that took place between the appellant and the deceased, regarding theft of fencing of the tea garden. 7. Smti. Rina Gowala, who lodged the FIR (ext. 7), in her evidence, given as PW-1, stated that in the evening of the occurrence, the appellant had enquired from her about the where about of her husband and that, on the next morning, Sri Sankar Gowala i.e. PW-2 informed her about the finding of the dead body of her husband. She also stated that, coming to know about the death of her husband, she rushed to the Talap P.S. for lodging the FIR and that police at Talap P.S. advised her to lodge the same with the Doom-Dooma P.S. and accordingly she submitted the FIR with the Doom-Dooma P.S.. She also stated that in the Talap P.S. she found the appellant in the custody of the police and that the appellant had confessed before her that he had killed her husband. This witness was duly cross-examined on behalf of the defence. She denied the suggestion, put to her, that the appellant did not confess his guilt. In her FIR i.e. ext. No. 7 the informant did not disclose the identity of the person, who had visited her house in search of her husband. This witness was duly cross-examined on behalf of the defence. She denied the suggestion, put to her, that the appellant did not confess his guilt. In her FIR i.e. ext. No. 7 the informant did not disclose the identity of the person, who had visited her house in search of her husband. In the FIR, she clearly stated that she could not recognize the person, who had enquired about her husband. She further stated that a quarrel had taken place regarding theft of fencing.In the FIR, she put her thumb impression and the same was written by a police officer in the Talap P.S.. This witness did not tell the police at the time of giving evidence under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that the appellant had visited her house. Therefore, we find no force in her evidence to believe that the appellant had visited her house, in search of her husband. Despite her cross examination made on behalf of the defence, her evidence, regarding the said quarrel could not be demolished. Therefore, it is found that the appellant and the deceased had no good relation and the said quarrel might have been the motive behind the crime. 8. Sri Sankar Gowala, deposing as PW-2, stated that, on the next morning of the date of occurrence, he found the dead body of the deceased lying on the road of the section No. 4/5 of the tea garden. He further stated that the dead body bore injuries on the head and the back. Corroborating the evidence of PW-1, he stated that he informed about the incident to Smti. Reena Gowala, the wife of the deceased and thereafter, accompanied her to the Talap P.S., where from they went to the Doom-Dooma P.S., for lodging the FIR. Supporting the evidence of PW-1, he also stated that the appellant was found, confined, in the Talap P.S. 9. Sri Sukra Karmakar (PW-3), stated that Falgu i.e. the husband of the PW-1 was killed by somebody. He did not state anything against the appellant. 10. Sri G.M. Gogoi, PW-4, an auto-rickshaw driver,stated that one evening, in the month of November, the appellant and another person went to Talap P.S., in his Auto-rickshaw and that the appellant had confessed, in the Police station, that he had killed the person with the daorhe carried. According to this witness the said dao was seized by the police vide exl. According to this witness the said dao was seized by the police vide exl. No. 1 and the appellant was arrested. He has exhibited the seizure list as ext. No. 1 and his signatures there on as ext. No. 1 (1) He has also exhibited the seized dao as material ext. No. 1. This witness was duly cross-examined by the defence. In his cross- examination he stated that his auto-rickshaw was hired by the appellant forgoing to the P.S. He categorically denied the suggestion, that he did not carry the appellant in his auto-rickshaw. There is nothing on record to show that P W-4, who was an auto-rickshaw driver, had any reason to falsely implicate the appellant. From his evidence, we find that this appellant, after committing the offence had appeared in the Talap P.S. along with another person and he had made extra-judicial confession. He has supported the evidence of PW-1 and PW-2 that they found the appellant in the police station. Therefore, we find sufficient corroboration to believe the evidence of PW-1 and PW-2 that they had seen the appellant in the Talap P.S. 11. Mr. Riki Konwar, who was an independent witness, deposing as P W-10, in tune with the evidence of P W-4 stated that, on the date of occurrence, at about 7-30 P.M., the appellant had visited his house and informed him and disclosed that he had killed Falgu with the dao he was carrying. According to this witness, on being requested by the appellant he took him to the Talap P. S., in an autho-rickshaw. He further stated that police took the appellant into custody and seized the dao vide ext. No.1. He has exhibited his signature as ext. 1 (4) and the seized dao as material ext No. 1. Though this witness was cross-examined, no contradiction could be elicited to demolish his evidence. From the evidence of P W-10 it is clearly found that the appellant, after committing the alleged crime made extra-judicial confession before him regarding his involvement and proceeded to the Talap P.S. in an auto-rickshaw. We have already found from the evidence of the auto-rickshaw driver (P W-4) that the appellant and another person i.e. PW-10 proceeded to the police station in his auto-rickshaw. 12. We have already found from the evidence of the auto-rickshaw driver (P W-4) that the appellant and another person i.e. PW-10 proceeded to the police station in his auto-rickshaw. 12. Sri Samir Paul a police constable deposing a PW-5 stated that, on 26.05.2011, while he was performing the sentry duty in Talap P.S. the appellant and another person visited the P. S. in an auto-rickshaw He also stated that the appellant, who had a dao in his hand, stated that he had killed a person. According to this witness, on such appearance, the in-charge of the Police station took the appellant into custody and seized the dao vide ext. No. 1. He also exhibited his signature as ext. No. 1 (2) and the seized dao as material ext. No. 1. Though this witness was a police constable, he was not connected with the investigation of this case. He was performing the sentry duty in the police station and according to this witness the appellant, immediately after arriving, in the police station had confessed his guilt His evidence regarding extra-judicial confession and seizure of the dao has been corroborated by PW-4 and PW-10. 13. Sri Dilip Kr. Agarwala, who is a businessman of the locality deposing as P W-6, stated that while he was talking with one Bijoy Gogoi in the Talap P.S. he found that the appellant, who was carrying a dao, in his hand, confessed that he had killed a man. He was also an witness to the seizure list (ext. No. 1). Ext. No. 1 (3) is his signature. From the cross-examination of this witness, no contradiction could be brought out to demolish his evidence aforesaid. 14. Sri Lakhindar Gowala (PW-7), came to know about the incident, on the next day and he appeared before the police as an witness. He had also put his thumb impression on the inquest report. He stated that the wife of the deceased had informed him that the deceased was killed by the appellant. 15. The medical officer who performed the autopsy found the following injuries :- "INJURIES. (1) On incised wound size 18 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. x brain depth present over left parietal region of scalp. On dissection found depressed and communited fracture of left parietal bone. (2) One incised wound size 19 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. x brain depth present over left temporal region of scalp. (1) On incised wound size 18 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. x brain depth present over left parietal region of scalp. On dissection found depressed and communited fracture of left parietal bone. (2) One incised wound size 19 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. x brain depth present over left temporal region of scalp. On dissection found depressed and communited fracture of left temporal bone. (3) One incised wound size 18 c.m. x 2 c.m. x brain depth present back of the head on occipital region. On dissection found communited fracture of occipital bone. (4) One incised wound size 14 c.m. x 2 c.m. x muscle vessel depth present over left lateral to left cheek. Extended from chin to left ear lobule; causing cut injuries of facial muscles' and left mandible, and left jugular vain. (5) One incised wound of size 14 c.m. x 2 c.m. x trechial depth present left lateral to neck. Extended from left lateral boarder of thyroid cartilage to left sterno clado mastoid muscles. (6) One incised wound size 3 c.m. x 1 c.m. x vertebral depth present on back of the chest at 2nd lumber vertebrae. (2) Cranium and spinal canal- Scalp and skull as described. Membrane lacerated. Sub dural and sub arochonoid haemorrhage present. Brain- Lacerated at left parital lobe and occipital lobe. The medical officer opined that the death was caused due to the injuries sustained by the deceased and that the injuries were anti-mortem caused by sharp weapon and homicidal in nature. The nature of the injuries and the type of weapon as indiczated by the medical evidence aforesaid supports the prosecution version that the injuries were caused with a dao i.e. a sharp cutting weapon. Admittedly, the dao was seized from the appellant, on being produced by him vide ext. 1. 16. Sri Puran Bhumij (PW-9), who was a worker of the garden, was present at the time of inquiry. He exhibited the inquest report as ext. 3 and his signature as Ext. 3(2). 17. PW-11, PW-12 and PW-13 were the police officers connected with the investigation of this case. Sri Bijoy Kr. Gogoi, Officer In-charge of Talap P.S., deposing as PW-11 stated that, on 26.11.2005, at about 8-10 p.m., the appellant, along with Riki Konwar (P W-10) appeared in the police station and that the appellant who was carrying a meat dao disclosed that he had killed a person named Fuglu. Sri Bijoy Kr. Gogoi, Officer In-charge of Talap P.S., deposing as PW-11 stated that, on 26.11.2005, at about 8-10 p.m., the appellant, along with Riki Konwar (P W-10) appeared in the police station and that the appellant who was carrying a meat dao disclosed that he had killed a person named Fuglu. Accordingly this witness made GD. Entry (Ext. 5) and seized the dao vide ext. No. 1, after taking the appellant into custody. He stated that coming to know about the lodging of FIR in Doom-Dooma P.S. he had handed over the seized dao and the accused person to the Officer In-charge, Doom-Dooma P.S. Though this witness was examined, on behalf of the defence, his evidence regarding appearance of the appellant, along with the seized dao, remained undemolished. His said evidence has been supported by PW-4, PW-5 PW-6 and PW-10 aforesaid. Sri Prafulla Borgohain, PW-12 stated that he was the Officer In-charge of the Doom-Dooma P.S. on the rrelevant time and on receipt of the case diary from the Investigating Officer (PW-13), he submitted the charge-sheet under Section 302 IPC. He had explained the charge as ext. 6. . MdWajidur Rahman (PW-13), who also invstigated into the matter stated that, during the investigation, he had conducted the inquest of the dead body, forwarded the same for post mortem report and recorded the statement of the witnesses. The said Investigating Officer, however, stated thatafter concluding the post mortem repor, he submitted case diary to the Officer In-charge. 18. In view of the above, considering entire aspect of the matter it is found that the deceased was missing from the evening of 25.11.2005 and his dead body with cut injuries on his person was found on the next morning in the tea garden. It has also been established that on 26.11.2005 at about 10 a.m. the appellant along with PW-10 arrived in the Talap police station and he surrendered with the dao. 19. From the evidence of the above discussed witnesses, i.e. PWs 4, 5, 6, and 10 it has also been found that the appellant made extra-judicial confession. The extra-judicial confession, made by the appellant before PW-5 and 6 appears to be made in the police station after his appearance therein. But the appellant made the confession before PW-4 and 10 prior to his arrival in the police station. The extra-judicial confession, made by the appellant before PW-5 and 6 appears to be made in the police station after his appearance therein. But the appellant made the confession before PW-4 and 10 prior to his arrival in the police station. Both PW-4 and 10 were independent persons without any biasness against the appellant. Hence, we find nohing to disbelieve their evidence, and as such, they are found to be reliable witnesses. Therefore, their evidence, regarding extra-judicial confession, is acceptable. 20. The PW-10 was also an witness to the seizure of said dao by police and he has exhibited the seized dao as ext. No. 1. There is nothing on record to show that this witness had any ill feeling or grudge to falsely implicate him. 21. PW-5 who was on Sentry duty in the police station supported the evidence of PW-10 that the appellant had appeared in the police station with a dao in his hand. 22. In view of the above, considering the entire aspect of the matter, we find sufficient corroboration in the evidence of the said PWs to believe that, on the fateful evening, the appellant appeared in the police station with a dao and he made extra-judicial confession before the witnesses indicating that he had killed the deceased with the said dao, which was seized as Material Ext. No. 1. 23. From the medical evidence, it has been established that the injuries were caused by a sharp cutting weapon i.e. an object like that of material ext. No. 1. It has also been established that earlier a quarrel had taken place between the appellant and the deceased regarding theft of fencing and on the fateful morning (27.11.2005), the dead body of the deceased was found, lying with serious cut injuries. Therefore, the circumstances that the appellant and the deceased had quarrel regarding theft of fencing, that the dead body of the deceased was found lying injured with injuries caused by a sharp cutting weapon, that the appellant appeared before the PW-10 with a dao, in his hand and made disclosure regarding his involvement with the crime, that the deceased sustained cut injuries caused by a weapon like material ext. No. 1, that the appellant, along with P W-10 and P W-4, surrendered in the Talap P.S. in the night of 26.11.2005 i.e. on the date of occurrence itself, that the appellant died due to the injuries, caused with a sharp cutting weapon, are the strong circumstantial evidence forming a complete chain of events, leading the irresistible conclusion that none, other than the appellant, had caused the death of the deceased. The said circumstantial evidence lend sufficient corroboration in favour of the extra-judicial confession, alleged to be made by the appellant. In our considered opinion, the above mentioned circumstantial evidence, coupled with the extra-judicial confession forcefully lead to the conclusion that the appellant had caused the death of the deceased by inflicting dao blows. Hence, it has been established that the death of the deceased was caused by the appellant and that the motive behind the death was the quarrel between both the parties. There is nothing on record to show that the appellant had any compelling circumstances to commit the alleged act of causing the death of the appellant. The said act does not fall under any of the exceptions provided by Section 300 IPC. Therefore, in the absence of any compelling circumstance and considering the nature and number of injuries sustained by the appellant and the weapon used it can be safely held that the appellant had inflicted the fatal blows with an intention to cause death of the deceased. Accordingly we find that the appellant committed offence under Section 302 IPC. In view of the above, we are inclined to hold that the learned trial Judge committed no error by recording the conviction and the sentence as indicated above. We find no merit in this appeal requiring interference. The appeal is dismissed and the impugned sentence and conviction are affirmed and upheld. 24. In view of the provision prescribed by Section 357(A) Cr.P.C. the victim or his/her dependents are entitled to get compensation for rehabilitation in appropriate cases. Therefore, for the sake of brevity and in the light of our discussions, made in Criminal Appeal No. 93(J)/2005 (disposed on 22.12.2011), with regard to the victim compensation, as provided by Section 357(A) Cr.P.C., we make the following directions: (1) As an interim measure, an amount of Rs. Therefore, for the sake of brevity and in the light of our discussions, made in Criminal Appeal No. 93(J)/2005 (disposed on 22.12.2011), with regard to the victim compensation, as provided by Section 357(A) Cr.P.C., we make the following directions: (1) As an interim measure, an amount of Rs. 50,000/- shall be deposited by the State Government with the District Legal Services Authority of Tinsukia District within a period of two months from this date. The District Legal Services Authority, on receipt of the said money,. Shall make an enquiry to ascertain as to whether, there is dependent (s), who suffered loss and injury as a result of death of the deceased and if such dependant (s) or legal representative(s) need any rehabilitation. (2) Upon such enquiry, if it is found that the dependent(s), if any, need rehabilitation, then the District Legal Services Authority shall initially release the said interim amount and thereafter direct payment of adequate compensation, as may be prescribed by the scheme to be prepared by the State Government. (3) It is made clear that if the District Legal Services Authority, after due enquiry, arrives at the findings that there is no dependent (s) or that the dependant (s) of the deceased/victim does not required any rehabilitation, then the District Legal Services Authority, shall refund the said amount of Rs. 50,000/-, without delay, in favour of the State Government. (4) For the purpose of providing financial assistance towards rehabilitation of the victim of his/her dependant (s), in appropriate case, and for proper implementation of such scheme, as provided by Section 357-A, Cr.P.C., it is necessary to ascertain the dependency factor and the financial status of such victim, his/her dependents, and of the accused person(s), as the case may be. Therefore, we direct that the Judicial Officers, working under, jurisdiction of this Court,, during the course of trial, shall ascertain (i) the financial status of the victim or his/her dependents), if any, (ii) whether such persons need rehabilitation, as the case may be and also the financial status of the accused persons (s). The said findings of the enquiry shall be reflected in the judgment. Registry shall furnish copy of this judgment to all the Judicial Officers under the jurisdiction of this Court. Before we part with this record, we appreciate the assistance rendered by Mrs. The said findings of the enquiry shall be reflected in the judgment. Registry shall furnish copy of this judgment to all the Judicial Officers under the jurisdiction of this Court. Before we part with this record, we appreciate the assistance rendered by Mrs. M.B. Bujarbaruah, learned counsel, as Amicus Curiae and direct that an amount of Rs. 5,000/- be paid to Mrs. M.B. Bujarbaruah, learned Amicus Curiae, by the State Legal Services Authority as her remuneration. Return the L.C.R. _____________