Manu Behari Chakma And 2 ORS. v. State Of Tripura
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFTRIPURA AGARTALA CRL.REV.P.No.56of2011 1.ShriManuBehariChakma,
2.ShriPurnalalChakma, 3.ShriTarunChakma,
.........Petitioners -Versus- TheStateofTripura ........Respondent BEFORE THEHON'BLEMR.JUSTICES.TALAPATRA : !" # $%
: $&
' :())*+)(,
% - .' /0 :28.07.2015 1 ': Yes No √ JUDGMENT&ORDER $
-
234526 $ .'
7' % )3(++)() % &8 +32 +))9 - % .
' "
[2]
293
#
4)(
: - 7' )+)3+)(( % $
)(5)(6;+)((#
7' % '
[2]
# 5<= (6 - "
% 5
6 1( ' (+)*+))9
(( ' ''
# #
# 8& "
1 # +4)*+))9 (+ -
#
8& "
!
% '
+4)*+))9
2(+))9
44>;2+,;24 ? # ' % '
0
% '
'
' #
' ?% '
'0
%
- 0 '
' @
'
2+,
#
24 ? '
44> ? # # -
' -
2
[3] [3] ? '
- 35 6 # ' 51(6 %
51+6
-5136#
8& ?% '
'0
$ 51,6?
35 6 - %
' # 7- 5<= 36 $
' %
-
# -
=
2(2 '
%
% - ' %
2+, ? '
% -
'' %
1 ' % % A "On my care full perusal on the case record I findthatFIRwaslodgedon24.06.2009andthe incident took place on 12.06.2009 at night at about11p.m.Itisalsoclearfromthecontents of the complaint petition that on the following day i.e, on 13.06.2009 injured was referred to KailashaharDistrictHospital.Inthisregardthe injuryreportwhichisexhibitedinthiscaseas ExbtD7 I find that on 13.06.2009 patient was admitted in the Kailashahar District Hospital who was under went operation on 17.06.2009 and discharged from the hospital on 23.06.2009. So in such a situation I find nothing wrong to lodge the complaint petition at a volatile stage.
According to complaint on thedateofoccurrencepolicewasinformedand in this regard some others witnesses also deposedthatpolice visitedthePOonthedate of occurrence soon after the incident. There is nothingonrecordtodisbelievetheirevidence. Itisfactthatexcepttheinjuredthereisnoeye witness in this case and it is also fact that no witness deposed that on the arrival in the PO they found the accused persons.
3
[4] though not in issue are so connected with the fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction are relevant. Fact which may be proved as part of must be facts otherthanthoseinissuebutthese facts must form part of very transaction and be thus connected with facts in issue. Evidence regarding facts in issue disclosed by a transactioncanbegivenU/SD5whileevidence regarding the same facts which must be connected with the facts in issue in a manner soastoformpartofthesametransactioncan be given U/SD6. A statement in order to be a part of must have been made substantially contemporaneously with the act or immediately after it.
So that there is no opportunityforreflectionorfabrication. Inthecaseinhandifweconsidertheevidence of PW NoD1, PW NoD3 and PW NoD4 than it revealsthathearinghallagullawhiletheyrush tothe shedfoundtheinjuredwith hisinjuries and at that point of time the injured disclosed the name of the accused persons to them. As such I considered that their above evidences are very much formidable in nature and are admissibleU/SD6oftheEvidenceAct."
'
- '
$ .'
' 7' )+)3+)(( $ .'
' % % ' A " On account of the clear and convincing evidencestatedbythevictimandhisevidence having received strong corroboration from the rest PWs including the medical evidence of doctor,Iamoftheopinionthattheprosecution case under section 325/34 IPC has been proved against the accused persons namely Purna Lal Chakma, Manobehari Chakma and TarunChakmabeyondtheshadowofdoubt.As such I am of the opinion that there is no infirmity in the judgment of the Ld. trial court in so far as he has convicted the accused persons under section 325/34 IPC and so the judgmentoftheLd.trialcourtdoesnotcallfor anyinterferenceinthisappeal." [5] !" #
' '
4
[5] 1( 0
'
% -
# ' (+ - #
% # B #
C '?
- 1(/+ #
'
%
-
' ?8 -
-
'
'
- !
'
'# ' 7' [6] $ &
' % -
-1+? -
1( 12%
% 7 #
14
5 = '
#6?
%
'
#%
[7]
# # C - #-
% # - # D [8] "
% 5
61( # %
5
[6] '
# -E
'
5146
- # '
#
' !
% ' ' # =
F
5126
'
# - '
! "
' 7
# # - '
0
'
% ''
- 7
$
7- # "
# #
(* - A "On the following day of the incident at morning I lodged the complaint in the P.S. whichwaswrittenbyoneBiswaparbaChakma. Mentionablethatnoactionwastakenbasedon my complaint dated 13.06.2009, as such on 24.06.2009 I lodged a fresh complaint against TarunChakma." ? = 1( # -
8 51*6 7
[9] %
51+6 (+)*+))9
(( #
'
$
6
[7] -
-
'
- - ' #
'
7- !
' #
E
'
# '
# $ ''
#
# # "
!
#
"
+>)*+))9
#
[10] 12 E =
F (+)*+))9 '
((2) # # ' E
'
5146
- # ' !
' 1( # - # '
$
- # - ' #
7- '
#
%
# #
#
"
#
#
=
'
- %
!
7
[8] %
+;2 % '#
%
[11] 14 E
'
-
'
((;(+# #
'
'
# 7 ' =
:
# E =
-
- #
% #
=
# #
[12] 1, $ % '
!
# '
'
# ' ?8
# % '
#
7- !
% '
% '
'
44>;2+,
#
24 ? !
= '
#
#
8
[9] [13] 1* 8 # '
#
13
- A "On13.06.2009IwasaMedicalOfficerofRGM, Hospital,KLs.onthatdayIattendedoneSunil Debnath in my said hospital who came to the hospitalwithhishistoryofassault.Patientwas under went operation on 17.06.2009 and dischargeon28.06.2009.OnmyexaminationI foundfractureleftTibiaduetohitbybluntand hard substance, it was dangerous in nature, I found the injury was fresh and grievious in nature. On 07.07.2009 as per requisition of policeofPTLP.S.inc/wPIL.P.S.CaseNo.31 of 2009 I prepare this injury report on identificationbythiswitness,theinjuryreport marked as Exbt.7 and his signature in it are markedasExbt.7/1(series)." [Emphasissupplied] [14]
% -
- %
1+ % -
1( 12
7
#
# ' - # "
<= 3 7-
-
-!
% 8& "
# - 0(3)*+))9 % #
?
7- 7-#
%
-
-1+$ %
!#
- - % % '
9
[10]
# :
' *5 =6 - 8,)));
' 25
6 ?
-
2,3 1+# 7
'
2,3$ - '
[15] !
% '
' -
2*) [16] !
% ' #
'
# E8# JUDGE
10