Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 180 (GAU)

Reena Hazarika v. State of Assam

2017-02-09

AJIT SINGH, MANOJIT BHUYAN

body2017
JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Manojit Bhuyan, J. 1. The appellant Reena Hazarika has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for causing the death of her husband Bipul Hazarika, aged about 42 years and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1000/- and with default stipulations. 2. The case of the prosecution is that in the intervening night of 10.05.2013 and 11.05.2013, the appellant killed her husband inside their one-room rented tin shed house by inflicting multiple chop wounds with a knife. The said knife which was recovered by Police and seized vide Seizure List (Ext.-2) is about 1 ft. long with the iron part constituting seven inches with a bent sharp point. Ejahar in the case was lodged by Monoj Kumar Deka (PW-1), who is one of the landlords of the room rented out to the appellant and the deceased. According to him, having seen Bipul Hazarika lying dead in the morning hours of 11.02.2013, he informed the matter to the Police over telephone. That later when he asked the appellant about the incident, she stated that her husband had been torturing her since last few days under the influence of liquor and raising commotion and being fed up with such conduct she killed her husband on the previous night by hacking him indiscriminately with the knife lying nearby. The information given to the Police over phone by PW-1 was entered as GD Entry No. 452 dated 11.05.2013 (12.20 PM) and the written ejahar was received on the same date at 7.45 PM and was registered as Noonmati P.S. Case No. 220/2013 under Section 302 IPC. On the basis of information received, Nilomani Malakar (PW-7), in his capacity as Sub Inspector of Police, visited the place of occurrence and found the dead body of Bipul Hazarika inside the room where both the appellant and the deceased resided. Memos were drawn, statement of witnesses present at the place of occurrence were recorded, the dead body of Bipul was sent to Gauhati Medical College & Hospital for post-mortem examination, one knife was recovered from the side of the entrance door to the room as well as a gunny bag containing one long trouser, a full-sleeve shirt and a towel vide Exhibit-2. Following receipt of the written ejahar, the appellant was arrested at 9 PM of 11.05.2013. Upon completion of investigation, Charge Sheet (Ext. Following receipt of the written ejahar, the appellant was arrested at 9 PM of 11.05.2013. Upon completion of investigation, Charge Sheet (Ext. 5) was submitted against the appellant under Section 302 IPC. The case being committed to trial, formal charge under Section 302 IPC was framed, the same was read over and explained to the appellant to which she pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Puja Hazarika, the minor daughter of both the appellant and the deceased was examined as CW-1. The appellant was also examined under Section 313 CrPC on 19.06.2014 and 20.09.2014, enabling her to explain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against her. 3. To bring home the guilt of the appellant, the prosecution examined 7 (seven) witnesses, including the Medical Officer and the Investigating Officer in the case. 4. Medical evidence was brought on record by Dr. Rituraj Chaliha (PW-6). He proved the Post Mortem Report (Ext.3) which described the injuries found on the person of the deceased, which were as follows: "Injuries: (i) Chop wound of size 11 cm x 2 cm x muscle deep present on left side of cheek 6 cm medical tragus and 1 cm above angle of mandible. (ii) Chop wound of size 9 cm x 2 cm x muscle deep present back of occipital region. (iii) Chop wound of size 4 cm x 2 cm x muscle deep present on left side of forearm. (iv) Laceration of size (5 x 4) cm present over left wrist joint on posterior aspect. (v) Chop wound of size (4 x 1) cm x muscle deep, present over temporal region on right side. (vi) Chop wound of size (6 x 2) cm of muscle deep present over back of scapula. (vii) Chop wound of size (2 x 1) cm x bone deep present right side of chest, 1 cm below right clavicle and 6 cm medical to shoulder joint. (viii) Fracture of temporal bone on both sides side. No ligature marks detected around the neck." In the opinion of PW-6 death was due to coma and hemorrhagic shock as a result of injuries sustained, which were ante-mortem and homicidal in nature caused by moderately heavy sharp cutting weapon. In cross, PW-6 stated that as the stomach was empty, there should not be any alcohol. Also, that the Injury No. 4 showed that the deceased may have attempted to save himself. 5. In cross, PW-6 stated that as the stomach was empty, there should not be any alcohol. Also, that the Injury No. 4 showed that the deceased may have attempted to save himself. 5. The testimony of the informant Monoj Kumar Deka (PW-1) along with Dipen Deka (PW-2) and Bhrigumoni Deka (PW-3) are relevant to the extent that as landlords they had gone over to the rented premises at around 10.30/11 PM of 10.05.2013 on learning that Bipul had sustained injury on the head as a result of falling due to his intoxicated condition. Although efforts were made to take him to the nearby medical centre by means of 108 Ambulance service, the same could not be done due to non-availability of conveyance and heavy downpour. They left the rented premises after having failed to take Bipul to the medical centre and it was only on the next morning they learnt that Bipul had expired. The rest of their testimony do not gain relevance as it clearly appears to be improved versions made before the Court. 6. The deposition of Puja Hazarika, aged about 9 years on the date of examination and daughter of Bipul and Reena Hazarika gains significance. Although she deposed as a child witness, her testimony was accepted as the Court found and recorded that she was capable of understanding the facts. According to Puja, on the night of 10.05.2013 she went to sleep after taking dinner. However, she heard a quarrel between her father and mother and that the former had assaulted her mother. Sometime later, the landlord uncle came to their house and put some dettol on the wound of her father and thereafter left. She had gone back to sleep with her mother and in the next morning she saw her father lying on the bed with blood coming out from his body which spread in the house. She also saw her mother crying and the landlord uncles again coming to their house in the morning. In the afternoon, Police came to their house and took away her father. She was also taken to the Police Station and thereafter sent her to Snehalaya. What is gathered from the testimony of Puja is that until the time she retired to bed, her father was alive and there was an injury which was attended to by the landlord uncle by applying dettol. She was also taken to the Police Station and thereafter sent her to Snehalaya. What is gathered from the testimony of Puja is that until the time she retired to bed, her father was alive and there was an injury which was attended to by the landlord uncle by applying dettol. She woke up the very next morning to the sight of her father lying on the bed with blood oozing out from the body. Having regard to the medical evidence and the multiple injuries found on the person of Bipul, all circumstances lead to the point that the said injuries occurred after Puja had retired to bed. Materials on record disclose that the couple along with their daughter were staying in a temporary shed with tin-roof and on the fateful night there was torrential rain. In the room where Bipul was found lying dead there were no other inmates, save and except the appellant and their minor daughter Puja. What appears from the evidence of Puja is that although she was a child of tender age, she had the intellectual capacity to understand the questions posed to her and to give rational answers thereto. On the face of it, her evidence as a child witness cannot stand to be rejected and, in fact, the trial Judge was also convinced about the quality and reliability of such evidence. We do not differ with the conclusion arrived at by the trial Judge as regards the quality and reliability of the evidence of Puja. 7. Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned Amicus Curiae submits that the evidence on record suggests that the injuries found on the person of Bipul were present even before the landlords had come over on the night of 10.05.2013 to take Bipul to nearby medical centre. He relies on the statements made by PW-1 and PW-2 before the Police under Section 161 CrPC wherein the appellant had asked for help as some unknown person had caused injuries to her husband. Reliance is also placed in the statement made by the appellant under Section 313 CrPC and more particularly to the answer given to Question No. 40. The appellant had stated that on the date of occurrence at about 8.30 PM when she had returned from work at Satgaon, she saw that her husband was lying in the room with bleeding injury. The appellant had stated that on the date of occurrence at about 8.30 PM when she had returned from work at Satgaon, she saw that her husband was lying in the room with bleeding injury. On her cry, Manoj Deka and his brothers had come over. She saw Monoj Deka (PW-1) putting dettol on the wound of her husband. She also called for 108 Ambulance service and when she tried to call the Police, Monoj Deka snatched the phone from her. She also stated that although she tried to take her husband to the medical centre, she could not do so due to the fact that Monoj Deka and others did not co-operate. Also, that Manoj Deka falsely implicated her and that her husband was physically assaulted earlier at some place by one Mintu Nath, Dipak Das and Jitu Deka while taking liquor and had brought her husband in injured condition and laid him in the room. She also saw the lock of her room in a broken condition. This statement against Question No. 40 is not believable. It clearly appears to be self contradictory tested against the answers given to Question No. 2 and Question No. 3. The persons by the names of Mintu Nath, Dipak Das and Jitu Deka were also not examined during the trial proceedings. Inconsistencies in the statements tendered by the appellant are conspicuous. The appellant utterly failed to explain as to how her husband sustained multiple chop wounds after Puja retired to bed and after PW-1 had gone back after administering dettol, having regard to the fact that the situs of the crime was the one-room rented house with only the appellant and her minor daughter being the inmates during the intervening night of 10.05.2013 and 11.05.2013. The appellant failed to give cogent explanation as to how her husband was found with multiple chop wounds on his person. In other words, no explanation was forthcoming as regards the homicidal death of Bipul inside the secrecy of the one room rented house. This itself leads to an important link to connect the homicidal death of Bipul to the direct involvement and culpability of the appellant to the crime in question. 8. Evidence on record shows that from the midnight hours till morning it was only the appellant and her minor daughter who were present in the scene of crime. This itself leads to an important link to connect the homicidal death of Bipul to the direct involvement and culpability of the appellant to the crime in question. 8. Evidence on record shows that from the midnight hours till morning it was only the appellant and her minor daughter who were present in the scene of crime. There was indeed a quarrel between the deceased and the appellant on the fateful night as per the deposition of CW-1. The knife recovered from the place of occurrence duly connects to the nature of injuries found on the person of Bipul. The case laid out by the prosecution, even when resting on circumstantial evidence, firmly establishes and unerringly points towards the guilt of the appellant. The circumstances surrounding the case are conclusive in nature with exclusion of every possible hypothesis except the one that has been proved by the prosecution. The submissions made by Mr. Mazumdar to discredit the prosecution case cannot be accepted. 9. On close scrutiny of the materials on record, we find ourselves in complete agreement with the findings of the trial Judge and hold that the prosecution has be able to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt in causing the death of her husband Bipul Hazarika. No interference is made to the conviction and sentence. The appeal being without merit stands accordingly dismissed. Lower Court Records be sent back forthwith.