Details - Dhemaji

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Meanwhile PW4 went back home as his home which was nearby. Then suddenly he heard the shouts of the victim saying “Doli- muk marile oye” from the front of the house of the accused. PW4 had seen the victim being dragged away by the accused. However PW4 also did not go near the victim to help him. Then the complainant and the victim’s family members went to help the victim. During cross examination he has stated that he could have helped the victim if he had wished to do so. I also find the versions of PW3 and PW4 hard to believe because they did not go to the place of occurrence to help the victim in spite of hearing shouts for help from the victim and watched him being assaulted and dragged away. PW2 had reached the place of incident first. She did not even recognize her husband initially from a distance and after only going nearer, she saw her husband being assaulted and she did not see the victim dragged away by the accused and the juvenile in-conflict with law. Her statement also contradicts the statement of PW3 and PW4 stating that they clearly saw the victim being assaulted from a far of distance. Therefore the prosecution story does not corroborated as whole in chain with the statement of the prosecution witnesses. I am of the view that the Prosecution witnesses have exaggerated their versions and definitely they had suppressed some facts of the incidence. 16) On the other hand, during the examination of the accused U/S-313 Cr. P. C. she has totally denied her involvement in the alleged offences of the case. She has stated that the prosecution witnesses had stated against her falsely in the case. She deposed that the victim had used dirty ballad words on her on the night of the incident, damaged her bamboo fencing gate/‘japoona’ and entered into her house by breaking her door open and assaulted her and fled away from there. The victim while fleeing had accidently left one of his shoes in the house of the accused and he might also fell down on the ground. 17) The PW1, PW3 and PW4 have deposed that the accused persons dragged the victim into their house after assaulting him; it is not believable
ecause in my view at such late night, they would not drag him at their house, that too in the absence the husband of the accused. The victim was also not became unconscious at that moment so why they would call more risk to their way. Finding of a shoe in the house of the accused revealed another story. I am of the view that the victim had gone to the house of the accused at night and then the incidence took place thereof. 18) Above all, the PW2/complainant could not even state who had written the FIR but she admitted that Exhibit 23(1) is her signature. The FIR was written in Assamese vernacular and there is no doubt that the informant is literate person since her signature in the FIR was also written in Assamese vernacular. Therefore the prosecution story to some extent is doubtful for having such contradictions of the complainant’s version and Ex.23/FIR. The prosecution has also failed to adduce the evidences of the scriber of the FIR. 19) The victim has stated that the complainant/his wife had filed this case on the very next day of the incident. The M/O/PW5 has stated that he examined the victim on 19-09-2008 at 3am on police requisition and he found the victim in movable and talk able condition at the time of examination. The FIR lodged at 10 am on the next date of the incident. I don’t think that during such a period, FIR was lodged without getting real story from the month of the victim or without knowledge of the victim too. 20) PW5 to PW7 are the doctors, who were examined the victim and PW8 is the I/O. They are formal witnesses only. Thus, I have no option but to believe that the incident took place at the house/compound of the accused. The FIR is not a sole substantive piece of evidence, but it can be used as a piece of corroborative evidence with other evidences available with the record and accordingly to reach out into a decision as to whether such asserted facts had taken place or not. In the present case, however, I don’t find any proof that the victim was wrongfully restrained by the accused when he was going to his house to call some persons to push and to get the
Page 1 and 2: DISTRICT: - DHEMAJI. IN THE COURT O
Page 3 and 4: Justice Board/ Dhemaji for holding
Page 5 and 6: q) Ex. No.26----Charge-sheet, dated
Page 7 and 8: Sir, xxxxxx------------------on 18-
Page 9: From both the cases, it reveals tha
Page 13 and 14: outside the house. They had also su
Page 15 and 16: Sections of the offences portion. W
Page 17: the accused guilty u/s-335 IPC, I c

Details - Dhemaji

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?