JUDGMENT Anima Hazarika, J. 1. Heard Ms. B. Das, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant and Mr. D. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing for the State. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 07.07.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Sonitpur, Tezpur in Sessions Case No. 184(S)/2006 whereby and whereunder the accused appellant herein was convicted under Section 326/302 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI for short) for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default of payment of fine, to undergo further RI for 6(six) months under Section 326 IPC and RI for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- in default of payment of fine, RI for 1(one) year under Section 302, IPC. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that an FIR was lodged by one Sri Binod Munda before the Officer-in-Charge, Missamari Police Station on 19.05.2005 alleging, inter alia, that at about 7PM., on 18.05.2005 when the father of the informant Sri Sawan Munda, informant's paternal uncle Chutu Babu alias Sunil Mura and the informant's maternal uncle Sri Bircha Munda went to the house of Mahesh Kandha, a co-villager, seeking the money they had to receive from him, said Mahesh caused grievous injuries to all the three with a sharp weapon. They rushed to Tezpur Civil Hospital and Chutu Babu @ Sunil Mura while undergoing treatment in the hospital succumbed to his injuries. On the date of filing of FIR, the other two were in a critical state undergoing treatment. 3. After receipt of the FIR so lodged, a case was registered as Missamari Police Station Case No. 35/2005 under Sections 326/302 IPC. 4. The offence being triable exclusively by the Court of Sessions, the same was committed to the Court of Sessions, Sonitpur at Tezpur by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonitpur at Tezpur, whereafter the learned Sessions Judge on the basis of the materials available on record and after hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties framed charges under Sections 326/302 IPC. The charges so framed being read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. The prosecution to substantiate its case has examined as many as 12 PWs including two Medical Officers (PW 1 and PW 2) and three Investigating Officers (PWs 10, 11 and 12). The charges so framed being read over and explained to the accused, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 5. The prosecution to substantiate its case has examined as many as 12 PWs including two Medical Officers (PW 1 and PW 2) and three Investigating Officers (PWs 10, 11 and 12). Defence also adduced one witness as DW-1. After completion of the trial accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., wherein he simply denied his involvement in the alleged offence. The learned Sessions Judge on the basis of the evidence recorded as well as materials available on record passed the impugned judgment and order and sentenced the accused as indicated hereinabove. 6. In the present case in hand, admittedly there are 6 eye witnesses namely PW-3 Sawan Munda, PW-4 Jagat Munda, PW-6 Pinky Khaka, PW-7 Bircha Mura, PW-8 Madan Mura, PW-9 Jogen Nath. Out of the aforesaid eye witnesses, PW-3 and PW-7 are the eye witnesses, who went to the house of the accused with the deceased and were also injured. PW-4, 6, 8 and 9 have seen the occurrence. 7. PW-1 is the Doctor, who held the post mortem on the dead body of Sunil Mura, who was only 28 years of age on the date of occurrence. PW-1 had found the following injuries: 1) One sharp cut injury on left side of face 1" below the left eye lower lid extending horizontally of 6 inch x 2 inch x 2 inch cutting ear lobate (left). This injury cutting ant. wall of left maxilla, neck of left mandible parotid gland (L), muscle and vessel. 2) One sharp cut injury on left side of face 1 inch below the first injury of 1 inch x 1/4 inch x 1/4 inch on molar eminence. 3) One sharp cut injury on left parital region of scalp of 1 inch x 1/4 inch x 1/4 inch 4) One skin thickness (scalp) injury of 1/2 inch x 1/4 inch above the third injury on left parietal region of scalp. Fracture on the ant. Wall of left maxilla exposing maxillary antram. Fracture of neck of left mandible and caronoid process. All injuries are ante-mortem in nature. In the opinion of the Doctor, cause of death was haemorrhage and shock as a result of the injury sustained. Exhibit 1 is the post mortem report and Exhibit 1(1) is the signature of PW-1. 8. Wall of left maxilla exposing maxillary antram. Fracture of neck of left mandible and caronoid process. All injuries are ante-mortem in nature. In the opinion of the Doctor, cause of death was haemorrhage and shock as a result of the injury sustained. Exhibit 1 is the post mortem report and Exhibit 1(1) is the signature of PW-1. 8. PW-2 is another Doctor, who examined the other injured persons namely Sawan Munda and Bircha Mura. On examination, PW-2 found the following injuries: Injuries of Sawan Munda: 1.6" x 1 x1" cut injury over hand in left fronto temporal region of seal above left ear involving upto bone by sharp weapon. Injury fresh caused by sharp weapon, a grievous injury. 2. Patient No. 2, (1) Sharp cut injury over neck left side back size 3" x 1" x 1". 2. Sharp cut injury over left forearm on medical aspect with cut 3rd, 4th, 5th finger. Injury-fresh, grievous (query) caused by sharp weapon. In the opinion of the Doctor, injury of both the patients had happened by falling on sharp object. 9. PW-3, Sawan Munda is the eye witness who went to the house of the accused with the deceased and Bircha Munda. PW-3 has alleged that on the date of occurrence he went to the house of the accused Mahesh Kandha along with Bircha Munda and Chutu Babu @ Sunil Mura as he has to receive an amount of Rs. 1620/- (Rupees one thousand six hundred twenty) only from the accused and from one Dilip Roy. Earlier he has visited him several times to receive the money but he did not pay the dues. In the month of May, 2005 they went to him once again asking for the dues when the accused started a quarrel. He told them "why you have kept on coming to me?" I will definitely pay your dues whenever I get money," saying so, he attacked them with khukri. At first accused caused cut injury to Bircha Munda and then to the deceased and to him. Sunil fell down at that place itself. They left the place and ran towards the village after sustaining injury. PW-3 sustained injuries in two ears, head and near the eyes. The accused inflicted a dao-blow in the head of PW-3 with material Exhibit 1 i.e. the khukri which is about one cubit in length. Sunil fell down at that place itself. They left the place and ran towards the village after sustaining injury. PW-3 sustained injuries in two ears, head and near the eyes. The accused inflicted a dao-blow in the head of PW-3 with material Exhibit 1 i.e. the khukri which is about one cubit in length. When Sunil came, they informed the incident in the village and went to Tezpur Civil Hospital. Sunil was assaulted in his head and he died on the way. The khukri pierced through the position from ear to mouth from left side of the face. Bircha sustained cut injury in his face and in the neck. They informed the matter to the Gaonburah. During cross examination, PW 3 stated that the house which they had visited that day is Dilip Roy's house. Mahesh was living there. Accused Mahesh did not come out even after they had called him. They were at the courtyard. Thereafter Mahesh came out from the house with a khukri behind his hand. They had not even imagined that the accused would attack them. So when he had attacked they could not resist. The suggestions put to him that they have filed a case against the accused for fulfilling an old grudge has been denied by him. 10. PW-4 Jagat Munda is another eye witness. He stated that he knows accused Mahesh. He also knew Sunil @ Chutu babu. About one year and nine months back, Bircha, Sunil and Sawan went to Dilip Roy's house. Mahesh used to live at Dilip Roy's house. From his house, he saw the accused cutting Sunil, Bircha and Sawan with a khukri when they came to ask for the money he owed to them. Sunil fell down there itself, while the other two left the place running. Seeing that, PW-4 proceeded and managed a vehicle and took all the three injured to Garubandha hospital wherefrom they were referred to Civil Hospital. However, Sunil died on the way. The other two were treated in the Civil Hospital. After the FIR was lodged, Police came and arrested the accused. When police seized the material Exhibit 1 i.e. the Khukri, he put his thumb impression on the seizure list. PW-2 further stated that the accused injured all with material Exhibit 1 i.e., the Khukri. However, Sunil died on the way. The other two were treated in the Civil Hospital. After the FIR was lodged, Police came and arrested the accused. When police seized the material Exhibit 1 i.e. the Khukri, he put his thumb impression on the seizure list. PW-2 further stated that the accused injured all with material Exhibit 1 i.e., the Khukri. During cross examination, PW 4 has stated that his house is situated in front of the house where accused person was staying. The distance is not much. Houses are visible from each other. When the victims had been at the courtyard, the accused armed with a khukri came out all of a sudden and charged at them. The victims told PW-4 that they had come to receive the money they owe from the accused. PW 4 went to the place of occurrence just after the assault/cut had taken place. About 30/40 people had assembled there. PW-4 had managed a vehicle and it was a Jeep wherein he put all the three injured, but Sunil died before reaching the Hospital. 11. PW-5 is a hearsay witness. He has stated that on the day of occurrence after hearing hue and cry, he came out and saw Sunil lying at Dilip Roy's house. He saw injury in the head and face of Sunil. Police seized material Exhibit 1 i.e. the khukri. He further stated that the accused informed the matter to the Gaonburah after cutting them. Exhibit 3(1) is his signature on Exhibit 3 i.e. the seizure list. During cross examination he has stated that he had seen the injury of the injured person but he had not seen the accused cutting them. 12. PW-6 Smti Pinky Khaka is also an eye witness. She has stated that she has seen everything from her house. Her evidence is corroborated on all aspects with the evidence of other eye witnesses. 13. PW-7 is also an eye witness, who on the date of occurrence went with Chutu Babu @ Sunil Mura and Sawan to the house of the accused to realize Rs. 1620/- (Rupees one thousand six hundred twenty) only which was their due from Dilip Roy and Mahesh Kandha (the accused) for the charges of cutting thatch. Then the accused, being armed with a khukri came charging at them and cut all the three of them. 1620/- (Rupees one thousand six hundred twenty) only which was their due from Dilip Roy and Mahesh Kandha (the accused) for the charges of cutting thatch. Then the accused, being armed with a khukri came charging at them and cut all the three of them. Chutu Babu @ Sunil Mura was hit in the face towards the neck, Sawan was hit in the face stretching from eyes to ear and PW-7 was hit in the neck and hand. Sustaining injury, Sunil fell down there itself. Sawan and PW-7 fled away from the place out of fear. Later village people took them to hospital in a vehicle but Sunil died on the way. They got themselves treated in the hospital. During cross examination, he stated that Sawan, Sunil and he himself have gone there seeking money. When they told about money, the accused did not come out of his house and said, he would definitely pay the money which he had to pay and had asked them why they had come there. Thereafter suddenly Mahesh came out with a khukri and inflicted cut blow on them. He denied the suggestions put to him that a false case has been filed against the accused since the accused had to pay money to them. 14. PW-8, Madan Mura and PW-9 Jogen Nath are also eye witnesses, who saw the accused hitting Bircha, Sawan and deceased Sunil. Their evidence also corroborated with the evidence of other eye witnesses in toto. 15. PW-10 is the Investigating Officer. He has stated that on 10.02.2006, he was attached to Missamari Police Station. Since the former Investigating Officer was transferred, he was entrusted with the charge of investigation of the case. After taking the charge, he collected the post mortem report and then submitted the charge sheet against Mahesh kandha under Section 302/326 IPC. Exhibit 5(1) is his signature and Exhibit 5 is the charge sheet. During cross examination he has stated that he has not done any more investigation in the case. 16. PW-11, Jayanta Kumar Barman is another Investigating Officer who has stated that on 19.05.2005 he was attached to Tezpur Police Station as a second TSI. On that day, Dr. S.P. Bordoloi of Kanaklata Civil Hospital informed him that injured Sunil Mura, brought there around 11.30 P.M., on 18.05.2005 had died. 16. PW-11, Jayanta Kumar Barman is another Investigating Officer who has stated that on 19.05.2005 he was attached to Tezpur Police Station as a second TSI. On that day, Dr. S.P. Bordoloi of Kanaklata Civil Hospital informed him that injured Sunil Mura, brought there around 11.30 P.M., on 18.05.2005 had died. Upon receipt of the information, the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station entrusted him the responsibility to take necessary action in that regard. Accordingly he went to Kanaklata Civil Hospital. A person called Madan Mura identified the deceased. PW-11 held inquest on the body. Thereafter he sent the dead body for post mortem examination. He collected the post mortem report himself and upon completion of his duty he send the subsidiary case diary to Missamari Police Station. In cross examination, the PW-11 has stated that he has recorded the statement of the witnesses at the hospital itself. Alongwith Madan Mura, he recorded the statement of Jogen Mura as well as Suren Mura. 17. PW-12 Gopiram Koch is yet another Investigating Officer. He has stated that on 19.05.2005 he was attached to Missamari Police Station as second officer. On that day, after receiving the FIR from complainant Binod Munda, the Officer-in-Charge registered a case and entrusted him to take charge of investigation. Accordingly, he went to the place of occurrence and drawn the sketch map i.e. Exhibit-8, interrogated the witnesses, recorded their statements and visited the Gaonburah's house and interrogated the Gaonburah. PW-12 seized the khukri from the accused person's possession in the Gaonburah's house itself. Exhibit 3 is the seizure list and Exhibit 3(2) is his signature. Since he was transferred before submitting the charge sheet, he handed over the case diary to the Officer-in-Charge. During cross examination, PW-12 has stated that on 19.05.2005, he had recorded statements of Binod Mura, Madan Munda, Pinky Khaka, Sauaram Majhi and Phuleswari Majhi. He recorded their statement at the place of occurrence itself. In the seizure list, he noted down that he seized a khukri from the possession of accused Mahesh Kandha, which is 20" in length. 18. DW-1, Lakhia Kurmi has stated that he knows nothing about the occurrence. He further stated that at that time he was not in the village. He was at his daughter's place. After coming home, he learnt about the incident. Depositions made by DW-1, therefore, do not help the accused. Prosecution declined to cross-examine DW-1. 19. 18. DW-1, Lakhia Kurmi has stated that he knows nothing about the occurrence. He further stated that at that time he was not in the village. He was at his daughter's place. After coming home, he learnt about the incident. Depositions made by DW-1, therefore, do not help the accused. Prosecution declined to cross-examine DW-1. 19. In the statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused simply denied his involvement in the occurrence and nothing has been said as to why he had inflicted the injury on the person of Bircha, Sawan and Sunil due to which Sunil died. 20. On the basis of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses as well as the materials available on record, the learned Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused as indicated hereinabove, which has been challenged by the accused from Jail in the instant appeal. 21. Admittedly there are 6 eye witnesses and the statements made by all the eye witnesses in the Court had corroborated each other. The defence could not bring any material inconsistency on record in the depositions of eye witnesses to discredit the eye witnesses. 22. On consideration of the evidence of the eyewitnesses, we find them reliable and trustworthy. The totality of the evidence of the eye witnesses and the supporting medical evidence are clinching enough to come to the conclusion that the accused appellant has caused the death of Sunil Mura and voluntarily, with intention and without provocation caused grievous hurt to Chotu Babu @ Sunil Mura (the deceased), Bircha Munda and Sawan Munda by means of a sharp cutting weapon i.e. Khukri. 23. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the prosecution having been able to prove the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt, the learned trial court committed no illegality and/or irregularity in convicting and sentencing the accused in the manner as indicated hereinabove. 24. Accordingly, the appeal is found to be devoid of merit. 25. We, therefore, affirm the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge and dismiss the appeal. 26. Before parting with the case, we would like to put on record the able assistance of Ms. B Das, learned Amicus Curiae to help the Court in arriving at the decision. The learned Amicus Curiae be paid a fee of Rs. 5000/-. Send down the Lower Court Records. Appeal dismissed