Guwahati: The Gauhati High Court has set aside an order of a trial court in Baksa district convicting a man for allegedly killing his mother and grievously injuring his brother. The ground for this decision was that incriminating circumstances were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
In a recent judgment, a division bench of the high court noted that the “incriminating circumstances” did not form a complete chain of events indicating that the accused had committed the offence.
Accordingly, the high court set aside the impugned judgment and order of sentence of the trial court, acquitting the appellant.
“We have found that the incriminating circumstances were not proven beyond reasonable doubt, and the circumstance of last seen was inconclusive. In our view, the order of conviction recorded by the trial court is not justified,” observed the division bench of the high court in the judgment.
The case dates back about 14 years when an FIR was lodged before the officer-in-charge, Barbari police station in Baksa district. The report stated that on August 9, 2009, the accused-appellant brutally attacked his mother and elder brother over a domestic matter, causing grievous injuries.
The mother of the accused was taken to Guwahati Medical College and Hospital, where she succumbed to her injuries.
A case was registered under Sections 302 and 326 of the IPC against the accused, and an investigation was carried out. A charge-sheet was submitted upon completion of the probe.
The trial court subsequently convicted the accused and sentenced him to life imprisonment under Section 302 and to rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section 326 of the IPC.
The accused filed an appeal before the high court challenging his conviction and order of sentence.
Dear Reader,
Every day, our team at EastMojo travels through rain, rough roads, and remote hills to bring you stories that matter – stories from your town, your people, your Northeast.
We do this because we believe in truthful, independent journalism. No big corporate backing, no government pressure – just honest reporting by local journalists who live and breathe the same air you do.
But to keep doing this work, we need you. Your small contribution helps us pay our reporters fairly, reach places others ignore, and keep asking the tough questions.
If you believe the Northeast deserves its own fearless voice, stand with us.
Support independent journalism. Be a Member.
Thank you,
Karma Paljor
Editor-in-Chief, eastmojo.com
The counsel representing the accused-appellant argued that there was no eyewitness to the incident. Additionally, the brother of the accused, while deposing before the trial court, stated that he was unable to identify the person who assaulted him from behind.
On the other hand, the additional public prosecutor submitted that the witnesses examined by the prosecution had failed to prove that the appellant was the perpetrator of the crime.
Also Read | NFR transforms old train coaches into restaurants for passengers