Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 908 (GAU)

Ratneswar Hira v. State of Assam

2016-10-03

AJIT SINGH, N.CHAUDHURY

body2016
JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Ajit Singh, J. The sole appellant Ratneswar Hira has been convicted under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5,000/-with default stipulation. He has also been convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 3 years. The jail sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. 2. The facts in short are these. The appellant is husband of Akan Hira (PW-2) and he lived as “Gharjowai” i.e. residing in the house of her father at village Athgaon falling within the jurisdiction of Police Station Kamalpur, District Kamrup. Nagen Hira (PW-1) is elder brother of Akan Hira. He too lived in the same compound along with his wife Rajkumari. The appellant used to do daily wage work. On the morning of 19.4.2009, he left the house for work, but soon came back because he could not find any work. Over some issue at home, he started abusing Akan Hira and pushed her out of the house. Akan Hira though fell outside the house, even then, the appellant assaulted and caused injuries to her with a dao. Seeing this, Rajkumari (her sister-in-law) naturally rushed to save her. And while Rajkumari was trying to save Akan Hira, the appellant dealt a blow on the neck of Rajkumari with a dao. Rajkumari died on the spot and the appellant ran away. Later, the public caught hold of the appellant and tied him with a rope. At that time, Nagen Hira was at the place of his work. He was informed by his niece and nephew about the incident. He, therefore, returned home and found the injured dead body of Rajkumari lying in the courtyard. He also found Akan Hira sitting in the courtyard with injuries on her body. On his asking, Akan Hira narrated the incident to him. Nagen Hira then made the ejahar exhibit 1 at Police Station Kamalpur against the appellant. 3. Police immediately referred Akan Hira to Primary Health Centre, Kamalpur for her medical examination. Dr. AK Dhing (PW- 6) found three incised wounds on her person. One incised wound was on forearm with a suspected fracture of forearm bones; one incised wound in the middle part of middle and ring finger (both fingers) and one incised wound on her right shoulder. The injury report of Dr. Dr. AK Dhing (PW- 6) found three incised wounds on her person. One incised wound was on forearm with a suspected fracture of forearm bones; one incised wound in the middle part of middle and ring finger (both fingers) and one incised wound on her right shoulder. The injury report of Dr. AK Dhing in this regard is exhibit 4. He opined that injuries were fresh and could have been caused by sharp cutting weapon. 4. On the same day, Dr. Dipak Kumar Das (PW-8) conducted the post mortem examination on the body of Rajkumari. He found two chopped injuries – one on the right side of the her neck and the other on the right front parietal region. He also found two incised wounds – one on her right upper forearm and the other in the right arm. The doctor in his post mortem examination report exhibit 5 opined that Rajkumari died due to fatal injury on her neck and that all the injuries were ante mortem in nature possibly caused by heavy sharp cutting weapon. 5. During trial, the appellant took the defence that it was Nagen Hira, who first tried to assault him and when his wife Akan Hira intervened, he caused injuries to her also. According to the appellant, Nagen Hira also killed Rajkumari with a dao and wrongly publicized that he had assaulted and killed the victim. The appellant, however, did not examine any witness in defence. 6. The trial court after appreciating the evidence of Akan Hira as well as the injury report exhibit 4 and post mortem examination report exhibit 5 convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid. The trial court out-rightly rejected the defence of appellant because it had no basis. 7. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, we are of the considered view that the appeal has no merit and deserves to be dismissed. Apparently, it is an open and shut case against the appellant. Akan Hira is an injured eye witness to the incident. As mentioned above, she is also wife of appellant and sister of Nagen Hira. If Nagen Hira had caused injuries to her and killed Rajkumari (his wife), she would have definitely named him as the assailant, instead of appellant. Apparently, it is an open and shut case against the appellant. Akan Hira is an injured eye witness to the incident. As mentioned above, she is also wife of appellant and sister of Nagen Hira. If Nagen Hira had caused injuries to her and killed Rajkumari (his wife), she would have definitely named him as the assailant, instead of appellant. It is to be noted that ejahar was lodged promptly on the date of incident itself wherein the appellant has been categorically named as the assailant. Akan Hira has clearly testified that it was appellant who had caused injuries to her with a dao and when Rajkumari intervened to save her, the appellant cut her neck with a dao apart from causing other injuries. Nothing has been brought out in the cross examination of Akan Hira to discredit her evidence. On the contrary, her evidence has been fully corroborated by the injury report exhibit 4. Dr. AK Dhing in his evidence has confirmed that he had examined Akan Hira on 19.4.2009 and found three incised wounds on her body. Likewise, Dr. Dipak Kumar Das has testified that Rajkumari had chopped and cut injuries and that she died due to fatal injury on her neck and the injuries on her body which were caused by heavy sharp cutting weapon. 8. Nagen Hira has supported the evidence of Akan Hira. According to him, on being informed about the incident, when he reached home, he found Akan Hira in an injured condition and also the body of Rajkumari was lying in the courtyard. He has further testified that on his asking, Akan Hira narrated that appellant had committed the crime whereupon he promptly made the ejahar against him. Likewise, Headman Kumud Kalita (PW-4) of village has also testified that on being informed about the incident, he too rushed to the place of occurrence and saw Akan Hira there with injuries on her body and Rajkumari lying in a pool of blood. According to Kumud Kalita, Akan Hira had disclosed that appellant had hacked Rajkumari to death with a dao and he had also caused injuries to her. Kumud Kalita has also confirmed that public had caught the appellant and tied him with a rope and was handed over to the police when it came to the place of occurrence. According to Kumud Kalita, Akan Hira had disclosed that appellant had hacked Rajkumari to death with a dao and he had also caused injuries to her. Kumud Kalita has also confirmed that public had caught the appellant and tied him with a rope and was handed over to the police when it came to the place of occurrence. There is thus overwhelming evidence against the appellant that he alone was the perpetrator of the crime. The appeal is dismissed.