JUDGMENT C.R. Sarma, J. 1. This appeal from jail is directed against the judgment and order, dated 29.03.2006, passed by the learned Ad-hoc Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Sonitpur, Tezpur in Sessions Case No. 15(S)/2004. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted Sri Baleswar Sawtal, hereinafter called the appellant under Section 448 /302 IPC and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 months for his conviction under section 448 IPC and imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default rigorous imprisonment for another period of two months for his conviction under section 302 IPC. It has been directed that both the sentences; shall run concurrently. Being aggrieved by the said conviction and sentence, the convicted person as appellant has come up with this appeal. We have heard Ms. M. Bujarbarua, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant and Mr. D. Das, learned Addl. P.P., Assam, appearing for the State respondent. The prosecution case, in brief, is that, on 21.10.2004 at about 8 p.m., the; appellant, being armed with an iron rod tress-passed into the premises of Rameswar Hemron (hereinafter called the deceased) and assaulted him with the said iron rod causing his death. Sri Saharai Hemron (PW -5) who was the father of the deceased lodged an FIR (ext. 4) with the police. On receipt of the said FIR (ext. 4) police registered a case and launched investigation into the matter. During the course of investigation police visited the place of occurrence, forwarded the dead body of the deceased for postmortem examination, examined the witnesses, prepared inquest report (ext. 2). At the close of the investigation police submitted charge-sheet for the offences under sections 448 /302 IPC against the appellant. 2. The offence under section 302 being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed by the learned Magistrate. Accordingly the learned Sessions Judge framed charges under sections 448 /302 IPC. The charges were read over and explained to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses including the medical officer (PW -1), who performed the autopsy of the dead body and the investigating police officers PW Nos. 8 and 9. The charges were read over and explained to the appellant to which he pleaded not guilty. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 9 witnesses including the medical officer (PW -1), who performed the autopsy of the dead body and the investigating police officers PW Nos. 8 and 9. At the conclusion of the examination of the prosecution witnesses the accused person (appellant) was examined under section 302 IPC to which he denied the allegations brought against him and declined to adduce defence evidence. Considering the evidence on record, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant as indicated above. 3. Ms. M. Bujarbaruah, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant has submitted that the prosecution failed to adduce sufficient reliable evidence and that the learned Sessions Judge committed error by recording the conviction and sentence as indicated above. On behalf of the appellant it is submitted that, except the evidence of PW -3 and the wife of the deceased (PW -4), there is no other direct evidence to substantiate the involvement of the appellant with the death of the deceased. Therefore, it is submitted that the prosecution failed to prove its case, beyond all reasonable doubt. 4. Refuting the said argument, advanced by the learned Amicus Curiae, Mr. D. Das, learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that, apart from the circumstantial evidence, revealed by the prosecution witnesses, there is direct evidence, given by two eye witnesses i.e. PW -3 and PW -4, which are sufficient to base the conviction and as such the learned Sessions Judge committed no error by holding the appellant guilty of the offence as indicated above. 5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and considering the evidence, on record, we find that there is no dispute regarding the death of the deceased. The FIR (ext. 4), lodged by PW -5 i.e. the father of the deceased, indicates that the occurrence took place on the night of 21.10.2004 at about 8 p.m. In the FIR it has been clearly stated that the deceased died on the spot i.e. in his house due to the injuries sustained by him. The informant aforesaid did not see the incident i.e. the assault caused by the appellant. The informant aforesaid did not see the incident i.e. the assault caused by the appellant. He arrived at the place of occurrence, on being informed by some other person and upon his arrival he found that villagers had already gathered at the place of occurrence, where the dead body of the deceased was lying in injured condition. Though this witness was cross-examined on behalf of the defence his evidence regarding the injuries sustained by the deceased on the fateful night remained unchallenged. 6. The medical officer who performed the post-mortem examination on the next day, deposed as PW No. 1. The said medical officer stated that he found the following injuries in respect of the dead body of the deceased:- Injury: (1) One 2" (sharp cut) X 1/2" X 1/2" placed transversely over left side of occiput. (2) 1/2" X 1/4" X 1/2" sharp cut placed obliquely downwards to front in front of left ear. Scalp injuries as described below: Depressed fracture placed transversely beneath the cut wound over occiput. Tear of dura meter seen on occiput on the left side. Haemorrhage present on occipital region (subdural). The medical officer opined that the injuries were anti mortem in nature and that the injuries sustained were sufficient to cause death. He has exhibited the post mortem report as ext. No. 1. The said medical evidence, given by PW -1, remained un-controverted. From the above medical evidence it is found that the deceased sustained injuries on the scalp and the injury No. 1 was: the cause of death. In view of the above, there is no dispute that the deceased sustained fatal injuries on his scalp, on the night of 21.10.2004. 7. Now, the question is as to whether the appellant had caused the said fatal injuries. In the present case except PW -3, PW -4 and PW -6 other non-official witnesses i.e. PW -2, PW -5 and PW -7 were reported by others. From their evidence it is found that, immediately after the incident, they had rushed to the place of occurrence and found the dead body of the deceased in injured condition. The medical evidence rendered by PW -1 has substantiated the prosecution version that the deceased sustained injuries. Therefore, we find sufficient corroboration regarding the injuries, sustained by the deceased. 8. From their evidence it is found that, immediately after the incident, they had rushed to the place of occurrence and found the dead body of the deceased in injured condition. The medical evidence rendered by PW -1 has substantiated the prosecution version that the deceased sustained injuries. Therefore, we find sufficient corroboration regarding the injuries, sustained by the deceased. 8. Sri Chala Hemron, a nephew of the deceased, deposing as PW -3, stated that he had seen the incident. According to this witness hearing a commotion he came out from his house and saw the appellant assaulting the deceased with an iron rod. This witnesses clearly stated that the appellant had given two blows on the head of the deceased as a result of which the deceased had fallen down and succumb to the injuries. This witness further stated that, immediately after his arrival in the place of occurrence, the appellant had fled the place. Though this witness was thoroughly cross-examined on behalf of the defence no contradiction or material omission could be elicited to render his evidence disbelievable. His evidence regarding the assault, caused by the appellant remained undemolished. There is nothing on record to show that this witness had ill feeling or grudge against the appellant to falsely implicate him, leaving the actual culprit. There is nothing against the credibility of the witness. In view of the above, we find no reason to dis-believe the forceful evidence given by PW -3 aforesaid. 9. The evidence given by PW -3 regarding involvement of the appellant has been fully supported by Smti. Salni Hemron, wife of the deceased, who deposed, as PW -4. The PW -4 stated that, while she was cooking rice in her house, she heard about a commotion and Coming out from her home saw the appellant beating her husband with an iron rod. She further stated that her husband was assaulted on his head and that she raised alarm. She further stated that they had boundary dispute with the appellant and that the same was settled. She also stated that the appellant, who had lost two of his children used to pick up quarrel with the deceased suspecting that the quackery of the deceased was responsible for the death of his children. In her cross-examination she stated that it was moonlit night. She also admitted that the deceased used to practice as a quack. She also stated that the appellant, who had lost two of his children used to pick up quarrel with the deceased suspecting that the quackery of the deceased was responsible for the death of his children. In her cross-examination she stated that it was moonlit night. She also admitted that the deceased used to practice as a quack. She further stated that she had snatched away the rod used by the appellant. From the cross-examination of this witness, made on behalf of the appellant, no material contradiction or omission could be revealed to make her evidence dis-believable. She being the wife of the deceased was the most natural witness to the occurrence and there was no reason, on her part to falsely implicate the appellant leaving the actual culprit. In view of absence of any other material contradiction or omission etc. we find no reason to dis-believe her evidence. From her evidence it has been established that her husband was a quack and the appellant suspected that the deceased was responsible for the death of his two children. The said evidence given by PW -5 indicates the motive behind the crime aforesaid. The evidence of PW -5 has supported by the evidence, given by Sri Siva Hemron (PW -6). PW -6 stated that upon hearing the hue and cry, raised by PW -5, he rushed to the place of occurrence and found the appellant running away after assaulting the deceased on his head with an iron rod. He further stated that PW -3 had already arrived in the place of occurrence. Though the investigating officers were examined as PW Nos. 8 and 9, no contradiction, in respect of the evidence given by the prosecution witnesses, more particularly, PW -3, PW -4, PW -6 have been proved. 10. In view of above discussed evidence, it is clearly found that the PW -3, P.W. -4 and PW -6 saw the appellant assaulting the deceased with an iron rod and that the deceased had succumbed to the said injuries. The said evidence given by the above mentioned eye witnesses remained un-controverted. The categorical statements made by the above mentioned eye witnesses clearly led to the conclusion that none other than the appellant had assaulted the deceased causing his death. 11. The said evidence given by the above mentioned eye witnesses remained un-controverted. The categorical statements made by the above mentioned eye witnesses clearly led to the conclusion that none other than the appellant had assaulted the deceased causing his death. 11. In view of above, we find no difficulty in holding that the prosecution could establish the charges, brought against the appellant, beyond all reasonable doubt. Therefore, we are inclined to hold that the learned Sessions Judge committed no error by recording conviction and sentence as indicated above. We find no merit in this appeal requiring interference with the impugned conviction and sentence. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The impugned conviction and sentence are upheld and affirmed. Return the case record. While acknowledging the assistance rendered by Smti. M. Bujarbaruah, learned Amicus Curiae, we direct that an amount of Rupees five thousand be paid to her as her remuneration by the Assam State Legal Services Authority. In view of the provision prescribed by Section 357(A) Cr. P.C. the victim's 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. 50,000/- shall be deposited by the State Government with the District Legal Services Authority of Sonitpur 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. (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 dependent (s), 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. Let copy of this judgment and order be furnished to Mr. Z. Kamar, learned Public Prosecutor, and the Chief Secretary to the Government of Assam, for doing the needful. Appeal dismissed