Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 971 (GAU)

Chowra Kujur v. State of Assam

2016-11-02

AJIT SINGH, N.CHAUDHURY

body2016
JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Ajit Singh, J. The sole appellant Chowra Kujur has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.3,000/- with default stipulation. 2. According to the prosecution case, on the morning of 2.8.2011, the appellant killed his own male child Anurag, aged 1½ years by hacking his neck with a dao. This he did in his own house situated at Line No.3, Pawoi Tea Estate, falling within the jurisdiction of Digboi Police Station. Sanatan Gowala (PW-2) was the Secretary of Village Defence Party. He in that capacity, telephonically informed the police about the incident. Likewise, Budhua Kujur (PW-1) made the ejahar (First Information Report) at Digboi Police Station. He is younger brother of appellant. In the ejahar, Budhua Kujur categorically named the appellant as an assailant of Anurag. On reaching the place of incident, the police forcibly opened the door of appellant’s house which was closed from inside. At that time, local residents were also present. After opening the door, dead body of Anurag was found lying inside the house. A dao smeared with blood was also found near the dead body. And the appellant was found hiding under a bed. Inquest report exhibit 5 of the dead body was prepared by the Executive Magistrate. Dr. PJ Dutta (PW-5) conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body. He found as many as three incised wounds on the neck. The neck of child Anurag but for skin attachment was virtually severed from the body. The doctor in his post mortem examination report exhibit 2 opined that death was due to injuries on the neck which were ante mortem and caused by a sharp cutting object. 3. During trial, the appellant pleaded false implication. He, however, did not adduce any evidence in defence. 4. The trial court, after appreciating the evidence brought on record by the prosecution, convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor, we are of the considered view that the appeal has no merit and deserves to be dismissed. As mentioned above, Budhua Kujur is younger brother of appellant. He has testified that on the date of incident, around 7 a.m., one Raju informed him that appellant had hacked Anurag to death. As mentioned above, Budhua Kujur is younger brother of appellant. He has testified that on the date of incident, around 7 a.m., one Raju informed him that appellant had hacked Anurag to death. He, therefore, immediately rushed to the house of appellant and found the door shut. Budhua Kujur has further testified that on opening the door, when he went inside, he saw injured body of Anurag lying on the floor. He also found the appellant hiding under a bed. According to the evidence of Budhua Kujur, he saw a pruning knife lying near the dead body. Nothing has been brought out in the cross examination of Budhua Kujur to discredit his evidence. He in fact clarified in the cross examination that although lot of people had gathered outside the house of appellant, not a single person went inside before opening the door. He also admitted to have made the ejahar against the appellant. No suggestion was put to this witness why he would falsely implicate the appellant. Sanathan Gowala has fully corroborated the evidence of Budhua Kujur. He too admits to have telephonically informed the police about the incident as Secretary of Village Defence Party. He in his evidence has confirmed that on opening the door of appellant’s house by the police in the presence of all, injured dead body of Anurag was found lying inside and the appellant was found hiding under a bed. He has also confirmed the seizure of dao by the police which was lying near the dead body. Similar is the evidence of Sunil Orang (PW-3). 6. Admittedly, the injured dead body of Anurag was found inside the house of appellant by the police in the presence of all including his younger brother Budhua Kujur and Secretary of Village Defence Party Sanatan Gowala. At that time, the appellant was also found hiding under a bed. Even the dao was found lying near the dead body. This discovery was made on forcibly opening the door of appellant’s house which was closed. No explanation has been given by the appellant how Anurag was hacked to death. The appellant was also arrested from his house. The evidence of Budhua Kujur and Sanatan Gowala and absolute silence of appellant regarding killing of Anurag leads to only one conclusion that he alone was the perpetrator of the crime. 7. The appeal has no merit and is accordingly dismissed.