Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 600 (GAU)

Lakhiram Kurmi v. State of Assam

2016-07-11

AJIT SINGH, SUMAN SHYAM

body2016
ORDER : Ajit Singh, C.J. Appellant Lakhiram Kurmi has been convicted under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/- with default stipulation for committing the murder of his wife Bhanu @ Nikita. 2. The appellant was married to Bhanu 3 months prior to the date of incident. Both used to work in the Rangapathar Tea Estate falling within the jurisdiction of Police Station Sonari. The appellant however believed that Bhanu was having illicit relations with one Ajay Kurmi. On 30.4.2008, at about 10 AM, Bhanu was having tea along with co-workers in the Tea Estate. At that time, the appellant was also working nearby with a pruning knife (Kalam Katari) commonly known as ‘dao’. The appellant then came to Bhanu and in the presence of co-workers, mercilessly caused multiple injuries to her by his pruning knife. Shocked and stunned Bhanu, after receiving injuries, dropped dead on the ground. The appellant, instead of running away, remained at the place of occurrence. He also held the knife in his hand. Md. Azizul Hoque (PW-1) employed as Clerk in the Tea Estate, informed Garden Manager Abdul Sobhan about the incident, who, in turn, telephonically called the police. Suren Bailung (PW-14), Sub Inspector of Police Station, Sonari, on reaching the place of occurrence, found appellant standing near the dead body of Bhanu with a knife in his hand. The appellant, then, on the asking of Suren Bailung, dropped the knife on the ground. Immediately, thereafter, the police took the appellant into custody and Md. Azizul Hoque lodged the Ejahar (Exhibit P1), wherein, he categorically named the appellant as an assailant of Bhanu. The police also seized the knife as Material Exhibit 1, vide Seizure Memo Exhibit P3, in the presence of witnesses – Md. Azizul Hoque (PW 1), Sunil Phukan (PW 2) and Jugal Rajowar (PW3). The Police even seized blood stained blouse of Bhanu and forwarded the same along with pruning knife in a sealed packet to the Directorate of Forensic Science, Assam, for their examination. 3. Dr. Diganta Kumar Das (PW-4) carried out the postmortem examination on the dead body of Bhanu. He found two fatal incised wounds on the head of Bhanu and multiple incised wounds on her both hands. The assault was so forceful that right wrist joint of Bhanu suffered a fracture. According to the opinion of Dr. 3. Dr. Diganta Kumar Das (PW-4) carried out the postmortem examination on the dead body of Bhanu. He found two fatal incised wounds on the head of Bhanu and multiple incised wounds on her both hands. The assault was so forceful that right wrist joint of Bhanu suffered a fracture. According to the opinion of Dr. Diganta Kumar Das, the cause of death of Bhanu was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of multiple injuries caused by sharp edge weapon. The doctor also opined that injuries found on the dead body of Bhanu could be caused by seized weapon – pruning knife (Kalam Katari). 4. The police recorded the statement of number of eye witnesses and after completing investigation, filed the charge sheet against the appellant for his prosecution under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. 5. During the trial, at the time of framing of charge, the appellant admitted his guilt. Even then, the trial court, instead of convicting the appellant, thought it proper to proceed with the trial. 6. Md. Azizul Hogue (PW-1), Sunil Phukan (PW-2), Jugal Rajowar (PW-3), Budheswari Rajowar (PW-5), Purnima Bakti (PW-6), Sunita Gowala (PW-7), Biren Majhi (PW-8) and Kartik Kurmi (PW-9) are co-workers in the Rangapathar Tea Estate. All these witnesses have stated in one voice that they were present at the place of occurrence and saw the appellant mercilessly killing his wife Bhanu in front of them with a pruning knife. The witnesses have stood firm in their evidence. In fact, nothing was put to them in their cross examination to establish that they would falsely implicate the appellant. Not only this, Kartik Kurmi, younger brother of the appellant too, has testified against the appellant. 7. During examination of appellant as an accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he again admitted his guilt by saying that witnesses – Budheswari Rajowar (PW-5), Purnima Bakti (PW-6), Sunita Gowala (PW-7), Biren Majhi (PW-8) and Kartik Kurmi (PW-9) have truly testified against him about his hacking Bhanu with a pruning knife. As already seen above, the evidence of eye witnesses is fully corroborated by the post mortem examination report of Bhanu. Also the Forensic Science Laboratory Report (Exhibit 12) confirmed the presence of human blood of Group ‘B’ both on the seized weapon of offence - Material Exhibit 1 and blood stained blouse of Bhanu. As already seen above, the evidence of eye witnesses is fully corroborated by the post mortem examination report of Bhanu. Also the Forensic Science Laboratory Report (Exhibit 12) confirmed the presence of human blood of Group ‘B’ both on the seized weapon of offence - Material Exhibit 1 and blood stained blouse of Bhanu. This further connects the appellant with the commission of crime. 8. For these reasons, we find no merit in the appeal. It is accordingly dismissed.