JUDGMENT : P.K. Saikia, J. This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 18.08.2012, rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Tinsukia in Sessions Case No.17(T) of 2011 convicting appellant herein, namely, Sri Chutu Gorh @ Sunil of offence U/s. 302 IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- ,in default, S.I. for another period of 6(six) months for the aforesaid offence. 2. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment, the appellant herein has preferred this appeal from jail citing several infirmities in the judgment under challenge. 3. We have heard Ms. B.Gogoi, learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. K.A.Mazumder, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent. 4. The brief facts, necessary for disposal of the present appeal are that on 20.12.2009 at about 6.00 p.m. Ananda Koiri (since deceased) Teru, Ganesh Koiri were sitting around the hearth in their courtyard of one Kalia Koiri (PW 2) enjoying warmth of it. PW 2 happens to be the brother of the deceased. Suddenly, the appellant herein along with one Puklu came to such place and started inflicting several dao blows on Ananda Koiri inflicting grievous injuries on him. Being so assaulted, he (Ananda Koiri) died at the Place of occurrence (PO) instantaneously. 5. The matter was immediately reported to the police. On receipt of the same, I/c. Langkashi Out Post made a G.D.Entry vide No. 274 dated 20.12.2009. In the meantime, I/C. Langkashi Out Post also rushed to the PO and arrested the appellant and also seized a dao on the strength of seizure list Ext.3. In the meantime, a written FIR was lodged by Sri Kalia Koiri (PW 2) and on the basis of which Bordubi P.S.Case No. 132/09 U/s. 302 IPC was registered. 6. It may be stated here that one Sri Pratap Borgohain, S.I. of Police who is also I/c. of Langakshi P.S. was entrusted to conduct investigation of the case. During the course of investigation, the IO got an inquest done on the dead body by the Magistrate. Thereafter, the dead body was sent to hospital for post mortem examination. In due course, the witnesses were examined and on completion of investigation, I.O. submitted charge sheet U/s. 302 IPC against the appellant. 7. During the course of investigation, the IO got an inquest done on the dead body by the Magistrate. Thereafter, the dead body was sent to hospital for post mortem examination. In due course, the witnesses were examined and on completion of investigation, I.O. submitted charge sheet U/s. 302 IPC against the appellant. 7. The learned Magistrate, before whom charge sheet was so laid, committed the case to the Court of Session since the offence U/s. 302 IPC is exclusively triable by Court of Session. The learned Sessions Judge, Tinsukia on receipt of the case on transfer and on hearing the learned counsel for the parties, framed charge U/s 302 IPC against the appellant and the charge, so framed, on being read over and explained to the appellant, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 8. During trial, the prosecution side had examined as many as 9(nine) witnesses including the informant, Medical Officer (M.O.) and the Investigating Officer (I.O.). The statements of the appellant was also recorded U/s. 313 CrPC. The plea of the appellant was of total denial. He, however, admitted that on the evening in question, police seized a dao from his house. On being required, the appellant declined to adduce any evidence in his defence. However, the learned Trial Court examined one Sri Puklu Garh as court witness. 9. On conclusion of the trial and on hearing the arguments, advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, the learned Sessions Judge, Tinsukia was pleased to convict the appellant of offence U/s. 302 IPC and sentenced him punishment as aforesaid. It is that judgment which has been assailed in the present appeal citing several infirmities in the judgment under challenge. 10. Ms. B.Gogoi, learned Amicus Curiae, appearing for the appellant contends that the judgment under challenge cannot be sustained since such a judgment was found more on conjecture and surmise than on facts. In that connection, it has been stated that the prime prosecution witnesses are PW 2, Sri Kalia Koiri, PW 3, Sri Teru Orang and PW 4, Sri Siva Koiri @ Shibu. But their evidence is found to be riddled with serious infirmities and as such, the Trial Court should not have placed any reliance on their testimonies. 11. In that connection, it has been stated that the prime prosecution witnesses are PW 2, Sri Kalia Koiri, PW 3, Sri Teru Orang and PW 4, Sri Siva Koiri @ Shibu. But their evidence is found to be riddled with serious infirmities and as such, the Trial Court should not have placed any reliance on their testimonies. 11. It has also been stated that though prosecution claims that the dao, used for committing the crime in question was seized from the house of the appellant on the evening in question, yet, such claim remains far from being established. Such a failure on a vital aspect of the prosecution case requires the court to view the entire prosecution case with enormous suspicion. 12. The learned Amicus Curiae further submits that though the incident in question was reported to the police on the evening in question itself and although on the basis of such information, a G.D.Entry was made by a police officer and came to the PO to conduct the investigation in respect of said incident, yet, such vital document was not produced before the Court. 13. Rather the prosecution has used the written information made before the police officer concerned on the next day as being the FIR which is not permissible under the law in view of the provisions contained in Section 162 of the CrPC. Since the document which was treated as FIR is found inadmissible in law, it again requires the court to view the prosecution case with more and more suspicion. 14. The learned Amicus Curiae again submits that though some other circumstances have been utilised by the prosecution to corroborate the claim of the prosecution that the appellant is the author of the crime in question, yet, such circumstances too could not be established which administer one more fatal blow to the prosecution case. 15. In view of the above and in view of the evidence rendered by the court witness, Sri Puklu Garh, who refused to support the prosecution case, the Trial Court could not have convicted the appellant of the offence, he was charged with . The learned Amicus Curiae, therefore, urges this Court to set aside the judgment under challenge and to acquit the appellant of the offence U/s. 302 IPC. 16. Mr. K.A.Mazumder, learned Addl. The learned Amicus Curiae, therefore, urges this Court to set aside the judgment under challenge and to acquit the appellant of the offence U/s. 302 IPC. 16. Mr. K.A.Mazumder, learned Addl. P.P.Assam, however, submits that most of the contentions, advanced by the learned Amicus Curiae, based not on fact. In support of such contention, it has been stated that PW 3 and PW 4 are the witnesses to the incident in question and they have given vivid description of such an incident and such evidence of witnesses remains totally undisturbed despite they were subjected to cross examination. 17. The prosecution side also proved very firmly that the weapon of offence, same being a dao, was recovered from the house of the appellant on the evening in question, and that too, on being produced by the accused person. The appellant in his statement U/s. 313 CrPC had admitted such a claim made by the prosecution. Therefore, prosecution has proved that the weapon used was recovered from the house of the appellant on the evening itself. 18. According to learned Addl. P.P.Assam, there are more and more materials to show that on the evening in question itself, so many persons arrived at the PO and found the victim lying dead in the courtyard of PW 2, who happens to be his own brother with whom the victim resided at the time of his death. Some of those people were examined as witnesses and they are heard saying that they learnt on arriving at the PO that the appellant had attacked, injured and killed the victim. Such evidences are relevant U/s. 6 of the Evidence Act. 19. All those evidences on record, according to the learned Addl. P.P.Assam, have proved the charge against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt and, therefore, having convicted the appellant U/s 302 IPC and having sentenced him to punishment as aforesaid by the Trial Court, it committed no error whatsoever. He, therefore, urges this Court to dismiss the appeal. 20. We have considered the rival submissions, advanced by the learned counsel for the parties having regard to the evidence on record. Before we proceed further, we find it necessary to have a look at the evidence of Doctor who conducted autopsy on the body of the deceased. He is Dr. Babul Hussain and was examined as PW 1. 20. We have considered the rival submissions, advanced by the learned counsel for the parties having regard to the evidence on record. Before we proceed further, we find it necessary to have a look at the evidence of Doctor who conducted autopsy on the body of the deceased. He is Dr. Babul Hussain and was examined as PW 1. According to him, on 21.12.09, he was posted at Tinsukia Civil Hospital. On that day he conducted autopsy on the body of the deceased and found the following:- "External Appearance:- A male dead body of about 23 years with dark brown complexion, average built, wearing Jeans Jacket, yellow ganji, red half pant, blue jangia, mouth closed, left eye open, covered almost whole body by clot of blood. Regirmortis present. Injuries :- 1. One 15cn x 4cm x 2cm sharp cut injury from the right lateral part of frontal region crossing the temporal bone upto mastoid region of back cutting the skin, ear pinna, cartilage and bone. 2. One sharp cut injury on the back of skull extending from the occipital region up to root of neck involving scalp and muscles of the neck and vessels 15cm x 12 cm cutting the spine and vertebrae. 3. 7cm x 5cm x 3cm sharp cut on left side of neck at lower part cutting skin, vessels and muscles. 4. 6cm x 2cm skin deep oblique sharp cut on left upper chest. 5. 5cm x 3cm x skin deep sharp cut on right upper chest. Scalp & Vertabrae :- As described. Stomach contained semi digested food with 110 ml. Of fluid. Small intestine contained digested food with gases and large intestine contained caecal matter with gases All other organs were normal and healthy. Opinion: in my opinion, death was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of sharp cut injuries, as described. All the injuries were antemortem. Approximate time since death was 12 to 24 hours. The injuries were homicidal. N.R.No.48/09 (dao) is shown to me and I can say that this weapon, which is rusted now, had it been sharp, it can cause the injuries, which I found on the dead body. Ext.1 is the post mortem report, Ext 1(1) is my signature." 21. Approximate time since death was 12 to 24 hours. The injuries were homicidal. N.R.No.48/09 (dao) is shown to me and I can say that this weapon, which is rusted now, had it been sharp, it can cause the injuries, which I found on the dead body. Ext.1 is the post mortem report, Ext 1(1) is my signature." 21. The evidence of Doctor reveals that the death of the victim was homicidal in nature and such death was occasioned by ante mortem wounds found inflicted on the body of the deceased caused by a sharp object. 22. So situated, let us consider the evidence of PW 3, Sri Teru Orang and PW 4, Sri Siva Koiri @ Shibu, who are the prime prosecution witnesses. According to PW 3, on the fateful evening , he along with PW 4,Sri Siva Koiri, Ganesh and the victim were gossiping in the courtyard of PW 2 sitting around the hearth enjoying its warmth. At that time, the appellant, Chutu Gorh and Puklu came to such place. On arriving at the place of occurrence, the appellant started inflicting blows on the victim with a dao. 23. Being so attacked, the victim sustained grievous injuries on his person for which he fell down at such place and died little thereafter. Out of fear, PW 3 fled the scene raising hue and cry. In the meantime, brother of the deceased and his wife and mother of the victim came out of their house and found the victim lying in the courtyard of the PW 2. He (PW 3) reported the matter to those persons who came to the PO little later. 24. PW 4, Sri Siva Koiri, another brother of the victim, deposes that on the fateful evening he came out of his house to purchase battery of a torch light. While he was proceeding nearby shop to purchase battery, he met the appellant and one Puklu. The appellant, Chutu enquired him as to whether the victim was in his house or not. PW 4 reported that the victim was taking warmth of fire by the side of the hearth in his courtyard. 25. Soon thereafter, he came home and saw the appellant, Chutu fleeing from the scene with a knife in his hand. Returning home, he saw his brother lying dead in the courtyard with injuries all over his body. PW 4 reported that the victim was taking warmth of fire by the side of the hearth in his courtyard. 25. Soon thereafter, he came home and saw the appellant, Chutu fleeing from the scene with a knife in his hand. Returning home, he saw his brother lying dead in the courtyard with injuries all over his body. The matter was reported to the police soon thereafter by his brother PW 2. Police came to the PO on that fateful evening itself and took stock of the situation. 26. We have found that the evidence of PW 2 has also been relied upon by the prosecution. According to PW 2, on that fateful evening, he was preparing meal inside his house. His brother Ananda (deceased) along with PW 3 and PW 4 were gossipping in the courtyard taking warm of fire by sitting around the hearth in their courtyard. In the meantime, he heard hue and cry in his courtyard for which he came out of his house. 27. Coming out of his house, PW 2 found his brother, Ananda lying on the ground with so many cut injuries on his body. They immediately raised hue and cry and came to know that the appellant had cut his brother inflicting grievous injuries with knife and fled the scene. The matter was reported to the police immediately. Police came to the PO soon after the incident. However, on the next day, he lodged the FIR. 28. We have also considered the evidence of PW 5, Sri Nandeshwar Moran, PW 6, Smti Anami @ Anamika Koiri, PW 7, Smti. Rina Koiri and PW 8, Smti. Rajina Koiri and found from the evidence that they were in their respective house on the evening in question which are very closed to the PO. According to them, they rushed to the PO hearing hue and cry from such place. 29. On arriving at the PO, they found the victim lying on the ground sustaining grievous injuries. They came to know from the other people, particularly, from PW 2, PW 3 and PW 4 that moments before , the appellant had assaulted the victim at the PO with a knife inflecting grievous injuries on the victim and fled the scene soon thereafter. 30. They came to know from the other people, particularly, from PW 2, PW 3 and PW 4 that moments before , the appellant had assaulted the victim at the PO with a knife inflecting grievous injuries on the victim and fled the scene soon thereafter. 30. We have perused the evidence of those PWs having regard to the evidence, they rendered in their cross examination and found that evidence of those PWs does not suffer from any serious infirmities. 31. In his evidence, PW 9, Sri Pratap Borgohain deposes that he got information of the incident in question at about 9 p.m on 20.12.2009 and thereafter, he made a G.D.Entry and rushed to the PO on the fateful evening itself. He arrested the appellant same night and seized a dao from the house of the appellant on the strength of seizure list Ext.3 and same was done in presence of the witnesses. Such evidence of PW 9 finds support from the other witnesses examined from the side of prosecution as well as from the statement of the appellant U/s. 313 CrPC. 32.Our forgoing discussion has now proved that the appellant had come to the house of the victim with a dao in his hand on the fateful evening in question and brutally assaulted the victim with such a dao causing his instantaneous death. The evidence of PW 2, PW 3 and PW 4 have made such position more than clear. 33. We have already found that the Doctor who conducted autopsy on 21.12.2009 found as many as 5(five) severe cut wounds on the body of the deceased which brought to his death. Such evidence of Doctor fortified more and more the claim of the prosecution that the appellant inflicted several dao blows on the victim which occasioned his instantaneous death. 34. We have also found from the evidence of I.O. and other witnesses that on the fateful evening itself, police was informed about the incident and being so informed, police came to the PO and also arrested the appellant same night. Police also seized a dao in presence of the witnesses on the strength of seizure list Ext.3. We have also found no reason to disbelieve such evidence of the witnesses. 35. Police also seized a dao in presence of the witnesses on the strength of seizure list Ext.3. We have also found no reason to disbelieve such evidence of the witnesses. 35. Moreover it is evident on record that other PWs who arrived at the PO moments after the incident, saw the victim lying in an injured condition with so many cut wounds on his body which also caused his death at the PO itself. Such evidences, in our opinion, being admissible U/s. 6 of the Evidence Act gives prosecution case more and more firm footing. 36. We have also found that the learned Amicus Curiae has pointed out that the investigation of the case in question commenced on the basis of information furnished on the fateful evening itself for which the police made a G.D.Entry on the basis of such information furnished on the night of 20.12.2009. However, the said G.D.Entry was not produced and proved in accordance with prescription of law. 37. Instead of proving such a vital document on the basis of which the case under consideration was set in motion, the prosecution has produced and proved the written information furnished to the police on 21.12.2009 as FIR which is not permissible in law since same was lodged with the police during the course of investigation. According to the learned Amicus Curiae, for such lapses on the part of the prosecution, the entire prosecution case needs to be thrown overboard. 38. We have considered such a submission and found that the GD Entry dated 20.12.2009 was the FIR in respect of incident in question but same was not produced before the Court. Rather it has utilised as written information rendered to the police on 21.12.2009 as the FIR which is evidently not permissible under the law. 39. But then, fact remains that prosecution has otherwise proved the case beyond all reasonable doubt and as such, only for aforesaid lapses, the prosecution case, in our considered opinion, cannot be brushed aside as claimed by the learned Amicus Curiae . 40. Resultantly, we have found that there is no serious infirmity in the prosecution case or for that matter, the judgment under challenge and as such, this appeal , being found devoid of merit, is dismissed. 41. Return the LCR forthwith. 42. We deeply appreciate the assistance rendered by Ms. B.Gogoi, learned Amicus Curiae in disposing the present appeal. 40. Resultantly, we have found that there is no serious infirmity in the prosecution case or for that matter, the judgment under challenge and as such, this appeal , being found devoid of merit, is dismissed. 41. Return the LCR forthwith. 42. We deeply appreciate the assistance rendered by Ms. B.Gogoi, learned Amicus Curiae in disposing the present appeal. The State is, therefore, directed to pay Rs. 7,500/- (Rupees Seven thousand five hundred) only as being her professional fee within a period of 3(three) months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. 43. Since the victim died a tragic death on 20.12.2009, we are of the opinion that in terms of Section 357A, some compensation needs to be paid to the legal heir(s) of the deceased. Accordingly, we direct the State of Assam to pay an amount to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- (Fifty thousand) only to the legal heir(s) of the deceased as being compensation. 44. The State of Assam is further directed to pay such amount to the State Legal Services Authority (in short, the SLSA) within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. On the receipt of such amount, the SLSA shall place such amount at the disposal of the District Legal Services Authority Tinsukia, Assam. 45. On the receipt of such amount by the District Legal Services Authority, Tinsukia, Assam, same would be disbursed to the legal representative(s) of the deceased on proper identification.