Debashis Das And Ors vs State Of Tripura

Arindam Lodh, J

Heard Mr. Debraj Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the convict-appellants as well as Mr. Sumit Debnath, learned Addl. P.P., appearing for the State-respondent.

This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 27.05.2017 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Dharmanagar, North Tripura in case No. S.T/T-1/0000027/2015, whereby and where-under the appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 of IPC and sentenced them to suffer R.I. for life each which shall mean imprisonment for the remaining part of his/her natural life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default to payment of fine, each has to further suffer R.I for another 1 year each for the said offence committed by them.

Prosecution case, as unfolded succinctly, is that one Biswajit Das had lodged a complaint with the Officer-in-Charge of Panisagar Police Station stating inter alia that on 20.10.2013, at around 11/11.30 o‟clock night a quarrel was ensued between his two cousin brothers, namely, Debashis Das and Biprajit Das involving family matter. In view of that altercation, Debashis Das had killed Biprajit Das as well as his wife Gita Das by way of hacking with sharp weapon, namely, „dao‟ and had kept those blood-soaked weapons of offence close to the bodies of the respective deceased in the court-yard of their house. The complainant, Biswajit Das along with some villagers could find the said smeared dead bodies and he came to learn that just after the incident, the accused-Debashis Das had fled away from his house.

Being endorsed, one Sub Inspector, namely, Sri Rupendra Debbarma(P.W.-11) started investigation on that night itself, came to the place of occurrence, conducted inquest over the death bodies, recorded statements of the available witnesses, seized the wearing apparels of the deceased and the accused persons, also seized the weapon of offence namely „dao‟, prepared the hand sketch map, sent the dead bodies for post-mortem examination at Panisagar CHC and arranged for recording of statement of Anjali Das, the 13 years old daughter of the deceased persons under Section 164(5) of CrPC and also caused arrest to the accused-persons.

After completion of the investigation, the investigating officer submitted charge-sheet against the accused-persons, namely, Debashis Das and Smt. Khana Das under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. The case being exclusively trialable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dharmangar, North Tripura committed the case to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, North Tripura. On receipt of the case record, the learned Sessions Judge had framed charges against both the accused-persons, the appellants herein under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. As many as 12 witnesses were examined to prove the charges and on closure of prosecution evidence, the accused-persons were examined under Section 313 of CrPC wherein they denied the incriminatory materials found against them in course of trial and also declined to produce any defence witness from their side. It is found that the accused-persons did not raise any specific issue in their defence. It is a case of total denial of prosecution evidences.

After hearing the arguments of both the sides, the learned Trial Judge had formulated the following points for decision:-

1) Whether the death of Biprajit Das and his wife Gita Das were homicidal in nature?

2) Whether the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention committed the murder of Biprajit Das and his wife Gita Das by intentionally causing their death and thus committed an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code?

After thorough scrutiny of the evidence on record and taking into account the submissions of the learned counsels of both the point of facts and law, learned Sessions Judge held that the accused-appellants had committed the murder of deceased, namely, Biprajit Das and his wife Gita Das by way of assaulting serious blows by two sharp cutting weapons, namely, „dao‟ and have convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants as aforestated.

We have considered the rival contention made by the learned counsels of the parties and have further scrutinised the evidence and materials on record.

Mr. D. Debbarma, learned counsel appearing for the accused-appellants submitted that the prosecution has failed to prove their projected case. None of the witnesses except P.W.-9 had seen the occurrence, and P.W.-9 should not be believed since she was aged about 13 years old only. The blood stains were not found in the wearing apparels of the accused-persons. The learned counsel further submitted that accused-appellants were implicated to the case falsely out of previous enmity and lastly, learned counsel had argued that the incident had occurred due to sudden quarrel and on a sudden provocation and it might be a case which would come under the purview of Section 304 part (II) of Indian Penal Code.

On the other hand, Mr. S. Debnath, learned Addl. P.P., relying particularly upon the evidence of P.W.-9, P.W.-4, P.W.-6 and P.W.-8 submitted that the prosecution has been able to prove that there was none except the accused-appellants who committed the murder of the deceased Biprajit Das and his wife Gita Das. Both the accused-appellants had used „dao‟ as weapon of offence and two „daos‟ were recovered from the place of occurrence. The blood-stains found in the said two „daos‟ were matched with the blood-stains of the deceased which would be evident from SFSL report. Defending the finding of the learned Trial Judge, the learned Addl. P.P., urged to uphold the conviction and sentence written by the learned Trial Judge.

For the purpose of appreciation of evidence and in view of the submissions as canvassed by the learned counsels, we have meticulously scrutinized the deposition of P.W.-9, who was aged about 16 years at the time of recording her evidence. P.W.-9 is the daughter of the deceased Biprajit Das and Gita Das. On the fateful night that is on 19.10.2013, she was at her own house with her parents. She has stated in her evidence that at the relevant time, her uncle Debashis Das and his wife were abusing her parents with abusive and slang languages which led her father to raise protest and went outside the hut. Within five minutes her mother also went there. She was inside her house. After few minutes she heard cry of her mother and she went out with a lighted torch when she noticed that Khana Das was touching a big „dao‟ on the neck of her father and Debashis Das her „Jethu‟ was causing blows of „dao‟ on her mother. She further deposed that having suffered with injuries her mother fell down and then Debashis Das went to her father and caused number of blows of „dao‟ on the body of her father. About entire portion of the throat of her father was cut. She has further stated in her evidence that she noticed that the body of her mother was totally blood-stained and seeing that she became afraid of and rushed to her house. When the cries of her parent were totally stopped then the neighbouring people rushed to the place of occurance. She was not in a position to cry seeing that incident. At that time her brother was only three years old and he was crying at that time for milk in her house. She has categorically stated that so far as she could recollect the name of the persons who came just after the incident were Narendra Das, Ashutosh Sharma and Biswajit Das. She could not see who telephoned the police. The dead bodies of her parents were lying at a distance of 1 cubit from each other. She saw the dead bodies in the entry of a common path which leads to the house of the accused at a distance of 10-12 cubits away from their house and that place would be about 5-6 cubits away from their gate. She also deposed that police examined her in connection with the case. Police also arranged for recording her statement by a Judicial Magistrate and she proved her two signatures which she gave in her deposition sheets in presence of Magistrate as Exbt.-12 and 12/1. She further deposed that by the light of the torch she could identify the accused-persons and saw the entire incident. She used to address Khana Das as „Jathumani‟ and Debashis Das as „Jethu‟. She has identified the accused-persons in the dock of the Court. She further stated that the torch light by which she had witnessesd the incident was seized by the police and she put her signature in the seizure list and identified the same in course of her deposition which was marked as Exbt-13. She further clarified that the colour of the torch was black; switch was yellow in colour which could contain three pencil batteries. She identified the torch light. On identification, the torch light was marked as Exbt.-MO-III. She volunteered that "Today in the Court the accused Khana Das also threatened me with dare consequences. I did not see meticulously the two dao‟s. So I could not identified the dao‟s today but one dao‟s was to some extent bigger in size".

After careful perusal of her cross examination, no such materials were elucidated which could shake her evidence.

P.W.-4, Ashutosh Sharma in course of trial deposed that Biprajit Das and Debashis Das were brothers and their house was situated in the south of his house and both them were inmates of the same house but used to reside in separate huts. Both Debashis Das and Biprajit Das used to quarrel with each other very often and he used to hear hue and cry from their house. The said witness further deposed that the incident took place on 19.10.2013 at about 10-11 P.M., and at that time he was in his house. Suddenly, he heard cry of human being saying „ Katiya lailo‟ and „maria lailo‟ (meaning of which is that somebody was cutting me and killing me). Thereafter he did not hear anything and the area was enveloped with total silence. So, he suspected commission of offence, then he called nearby five to six persons and amongst them he could recollect the name of Hirendra Das, Dipak Das, Nirendara Ch. Das and Liptu Das and with them he proceeded towards the house of Debashis Das. When he went inside the house of Debashis in the Court-yard adjacent to the pond of that house, he noticed that the dead body of Biprajit Das and his wife were lying spilled with blood. Then he called Debashis but he did not find Debashis but found his wife in front of the door. She replied that Debashis went out. The said witness further deposed that he also noticed one blood stained „kupa Dao‟ (sharp cutting weapon) with handle beside the body of Biprajit Das. He also noticed another blood-stained similar „dao‟ in the varandah of the hut of Debashis near the wife of Debashis. Then he telephoned the police station through his mobile phone. He disclosed his mobile number as 9612552334. On arrival of the police he disclosed his identity and narrated the incident and sought for police help. He further stated that the police came after half an hour and that when he telephoned the police, it would be about 11-11.30 P.M., and he specifically stated that police came at about 12-12.30 A.M. When police came, after sometime, they prepared inquest over the bodies of the deceased persons. Police prepared two inquest in respect of the two bodies and he put his signatures in both the inquest reports and he proved his signature in the inquest report of deceased Gita Das as Exbt-5 and his signature in the inquest report of deceased Biprajit Das as Exbt-6. The said witness further stated that he found multiple cut injuries on the bodies of Biprajit and his wife. Police seized the blood stained „daos‟ by preparing two seizure lists separately and he also put his signatures on those seizure lists. He identified his signatures in the seizure lists dated 20.10.2013 at about 03.35 hours and 03.38 hours as Exbt-7 and Exbt-8 respectively. Police also seized blood stained earth by preparing seizure list and he proved his signature in the said seizure list as Exbt-9. He specifically stated that the police recorded his statement at that time itself. The said witness had identified the accused-persons in the dock. He further deposed that the accused-persons had a dispute with the deceased with landed properties and in one occasion he also participated in the „Salishi‟ talk to solve their disputes. He further stated that several „Salishi‟ (meeting) took place at the instance of village elders, but with no result. The said witness in course of his evidence stated that he believed that both the accused-persons committed the murders. In the seized „daos‟ also he put his signature for identification and he proved the „dao‟ which was found in the varandah in the house of the Debashis as Exbt. MO-I and the „dao‟ which was found beside the body of the Biprajit as Exbt. MO.II.

P.W.-5, Sribash Das deposed that the incident took place in the month of October 2013 at the dead of night and his house is situated in the south of the house of deceased Biprajit Das and Debashis Das, the accused, intervened by one tilla at a 5 minutes walking distance. At that time he was sleeping. He woke up and went out for natural call and suddenly he heard sound of people of their village and out of curiosity, he went out to know what had happened and so following people, he went inside the house of Debashis Das. Before him police already arrived. He found dead bodies of Biprajit and his wife on the path of their house near the courtyard and pond. Both the bodies were spilled with blood with severe cut injuries. Beside the body of Biprajit he noticed one blood stained „dao‟. Police prepared inquest in his presence in respect of both bodies and obtained his signatures in the inquest. He proved his signatures in the inquests as Exbt-5/1 and 6/1 respectively. He further told that police also seized the „daos‟ in his presence. He proved the seizure list by which the „dao‟ was seized in front of the body of Biprajit as Ext.-7/1. Being drawn his attention to his signature present in respect of seizure of one „dao‟ on 20.10.2013 at about 03.38 hours, which was allegedly recovered from the varandah of Debashis, he admitted his signature on the seizure list as Exbt. 8/1. He put that signature on that very date and he could not recollect why he put signature. He also told that police also seized the blood stained earth nearby both dead bodies separately and he put his signature in that seizure list and he proved his signature as Exbt.-9/1. He also told that police arrested Debashis and the wife of Debashis. He identified both of them in the dock. Dead bodies were found in the joint path way of Biprajit and Debashis. But Biprajit and Debashis had separate houses having separate boundaries though entry was same. Biprajit had one son and daughter. Daughter of Biprajit at that time would be a student of class II/III and his son was younger than the daughter. Debashis had two sons and two daughters. He could not recollect whether he had seen the sons and daughters of Debashis on the date of incident when he visited there.

P.W.-6, Nirendra Das deposed that the incident took place on the following day of Laxmi Puja in the year 2013 on the common path of Biprajit Das and Debashis Das at South Padmabil. His house is situated about 30 to 40 nol away from the house of the deceased Biprajit Das and Debashis Das, the accused. His house is situated in the East of their house. Prior to the incident he heard quarrel from their house between Debashis and Biprajit. It would be about 11 P.M. Suddenly, he heard that Debashis was inviting Biprajit to come out saying that he would cut Biprajit and Biprajit replied that he would be coming out and by cutting him if Debashis found pleasure Debashis can do it and immediately after that he heard severe cries of Biprajit and thereafter he heard cries of female uttering „do not kill‟. Then he called his brother Hirendra Das and others namely Ashu Sarma, Dulu Das@ Gautam Das etc., and proceeded towards their house and in between no sound came out from that house. He further told that within half an hour they all reached to their house. First he saw the body of Biprajit lying on the ground with multiple cut injuries on his body without any movement on the pathway and thereafter he noticed the dead body of his wife lying with multiple injuries, in front of Biprajit. He also noticed one „Kupa dao‟ stained with blood. They first inquired whether Debahshis was present in the house or not. They found wife of Debashis on the veranda of his hut and she replied Debashis was not present in the house. In front of wife of Debashis in the veranda he saw another „dao‟ stained with blood which was of comparably big size. Then Ashu Sarma informed police through mobile. After some time police came. Police inquired whether deceased had any other relatives. Then he named Biswajit Das. Police prepared inquests and took the dead bodies for post mortem. Police seized both the „daos‟. Police also seized blood-stained earth from the place of occurrence. He did not sign in any seizure list. He believed that Debashis and his wife had committed the murders. He identified Exbt- MO I and II and he also identified both of the accused-persons in the dock.

P.W.-7, Pradyut Ch. Datta deposed that, in the intervening night of 19-20/10/2013 at about 1.05 A.M. in the dead of night, one Ashutosh Sarma informed through his mobile to the duty officer that in the house of Debashis Das situated at South Padmabil under Panisagar P.S. two persons were lying. He stated that he could not say whether they were alive or dead in that house. Few minutes earlier some quarrel took place and they heard some quarrel. That information was recorded by the GD staff in the GD entry no.605 at about 1.05. A.M. With that information he along with S.I. Rupendra Debbarma and staffs rushed to that spot to verify the matter. At about 2.20 A.M. on that date, they reached the spot which was the house of Debashis Das. He further deposed that S.I. Rupendra Debbarma was the I.O. of the case. At about 3.00 P.M. he recorded oral ejahar of one Sri Biswajit Das relative of Debashis Das. On the basis of oral ejahar made by said Biswajit Das, Panisgar P.S. case No.73/13 was registered and he proved that ejahar which bears his endorsement as Exbt-10. He read over and explained the contents to Biswajit Das and on spot he directed, S.I. Rupendra Debbarma to investigate the case. He could not actually recollect where he found the dead bodies. He found two dead bodies, one male and another female and the dead bodies were blood-stained with injuries. So far, he could recollect two „daos‟ were there and one „dao‟ was available in front of the dead body of Biprajit Das. He further deposed that on return to the P.S. on the basis of the ejahar he registered PNS P.S. case No.73/13 under Section 302 of IPC. He also filled up FIR form and he proved his registering endorsement which bears his signature as Exbt-10/1. He also proved the FIR form filed up by him as Exbt-11. Since the informant was found available in the place of occurrence and he was ready to give ejahar he did not take sou-moto FIR. The other persons gathered there were not willing to give ejahar. IO did not record his statement under Section 161 CrPC. He could not recollect at which time he returned but FIR was registered at about 8.15. A.M. At the time of inquest he was not present. He went out in search of the accused. As per FIR there was only one accused namely Debashis Das.

P.W.8, Biswajit Das deposed that on being drawn his attention to his alleged signature present in the ejahar of the case dated 20-10-2013, he proved his signature as Exbt-10/2, and told that he gave his signature when he went to the house of Debashis Das. He identified Debashis in the dock. He further told that one Nirendra Das went to his house in the dead of night and reported him that in the house of Debashis two murder took place in respect of Biprajit and his wife. When he went to the house of Debashis he simply noticed that in the entry road adjacent to the gate inside the hut of Debashis dead bodies were lying in a cut condition. He noticed one „dao‟ beneath the body of the Biprajit and another „dao‟ in the verendah of the hut of Debashis Das. He further deposed that when he visited there he found wife of Debashis in the verendah of the hut and he also noticed the son and daughter of Biprajit in the house of Biprajit. Police asked him some question and then he replied and, accordingly, he wrote down and obtained his signature in that paper which he proved as Exbt-10/2. He could not recollect actually what he stated to the police officer. He had also forgotten whether the said fact was reduced into writing by police officer and read over and explained to him.

P.W.-10, Kamal Das deposed that about 2/3 years back, one day the incident took place in the intervening night of Saturday and Sunday, he received the information from one Mantu Nath who was negotiator of marriage between his daughter Gita Das and one Kadi, but he could not recollect his real name. He was the grandfather of Anjali, daughter of his daughter, Gita. Receiving that information he availed night super on Sunday and reached at Dharmangar on Monday night. In this case Kadi and his daughter Gita were murdered. After coming at Dharmangar, he went to the house of his daughter i.e., the house of Kadi Das. In that house at that time Anjali and her younger brother Bishal aged about two and half (2 ½) years old were present. Besides, when he arrived there he also saw some local persons. In connection with this case police seized one black colour torch with yellow colour switch. On being produced by police, at about 10-11 am he signed in the seizure list and he proved his signature in the seizure list as Exbt-13/1 and he also identified Exbt-MO-III.

P.W-11, Rupendra Debbarma deposed that on 20-10-2013, on the basis of a telephonic information given by one Ashutosh Sharma son of Radha Raman Sharma of South Padmabill Panisagar P.S., entered GD entry no.605 at about 01.05 hours. Thereafter on the basis of that GD information he accompanied O/C, P. Datta and went to the house of Debashis Das. Information was that two dead bodies were lying in the house of Debashis Das situated at South Padmabil. They reached there at 2.20 P.M. and they noticed that the bodies were lying near the house of Debashis Das. He also noticed one „dao‟ near the body of Biprajit Das and another body was of a female, namely Gita Das. Local people identified the dead bodies to him. He also found „dao‟ in the verendah of Debashis Das. Both the dead bodies contained multiple cut injuries and totally blood stained. He also seized blood stained earth which fell on the body by the side of two dead bodies separately by one seizure list and he proved the seizure list as Exbt.-9/2. He further told that he seized the „dao‟ found near the body of Biprajit Das by a seizure list at about 3.35 hours and the „dao‟ was blood stained and he proved the said seizure list as Exbt-7/2. At about 2.35 hours he seized another „dao‟ which was about 1½ cubit in length from the veranda of Debashis Das which was also blood stained and he proved the said seizure list as Exbt.-8/2. He conducted the inquest over the body of the deceased in presence of witnesses Ashutosh Sharma, Goutam Das and Sribash Das by two separate inquests and he proved the said inquests as Exbt.-5/2(which is the inquest of the female) and Exbt-6/2(which is the inquest of the male). He further told that thereafter he prepared dead body challans engaging constable, Dipal Rudrapual for Post Mortem examination at Panisagar CHC and he proved the dead body challans as Exbt-14 and 15 respectively. At about 5.30 AM O/C, received an oral ejahar from the informant Biswajit das and reduced the oral ejahar into writing and FIR was sent to the P.S for registration. At the PO he recorded the statement of available witnesses namely Ashutosh Sharma, Goutam Das, Sribash Das. Thereafter, he conducted search for arrest of Debashis. He also prepared hand-sketch map with index and he proved the hand sketch map and the index as Exbt-16 and 17 respectively. Thereafter, he examined two other witnesses, namely Biswajit Das and Sukhamoy Das. At about 1.45 PM he arrested Debashis Das. Thereafter, he examined Anjali Das aged about 13 years, the daughter of the deceased. Thereafter he arrested Khana Das and he produced the accused persons before the court and also arranged for recording of statement of Anjali Das under Section 164 Cr.P.C. He also told that after arrest of Debashis he seized the wearing apparels of Debashis by a seizure list and he proved the said seizure list as Exbt-2/2. He seized the same on the following date of the incident. On 20.10.2013 after post mortem examination, he seized the wearing apparels of both the deceased at P.S. complex and constable Dipak Rudhapal produced the same before him and he proved the said seizure list as Exbt.-1/2. Upto that period the articles which he seized all were sent to SFSL for matching the blood of the deceased with the weapon of offence or with the wearing apparels of the accused persons. After arrest of Debashis Das he found some cut injuries on Debashis which was at his back and leg for which Debashis was treated at Panisagar CHC and he collected the injury report of Debashis from Panisgar ChC. Arrest memo of Debashis indicated that at the time of his arrest he had injuries. He further told that he did not submit the medical report of the medical officer in respect of Debashis Das for the period 20.10.2013. In the C.D., photocopy of the report was available. He had no explanation why he did not submit it with the case record. In that injury report, medical officer observed that after general physical examination he came to the conclusion that the person does not suffer from any medical injuries apparently. But in the finding he mentioned that small cut injury at left knee and back region. There was no mention whether the injury was fresh or old one. He again deposed that on 23.10.2013 again Debashis was taken to Panisagar CHC, OPD and he collected that report with hospital ticket. He could not understand the findings of the medical officer. But the medical officer was Dr. Pulak Chakma. In this case he also examined all other available witnesses and collected PM report of SFSL. After investigation a prima facie case was made out against Debashis Das and Khana Das, wife of Debashis, he submitted charge sheet under Section 302/34 of IPC vide Panisagar P.S. charge-sheet no. 11/14 dated 24.04.2014.

PW 3, Dr. Rajat Goswami deposed that on 20-10-2013 as medical officer of Panisagar CHC with reference to PNS PS GD entry no. 605 dated 20-10-2013 conducted PM examination over the body of the deceased Gita Das wife of late Biprajit Das a female of 35 years being identified by Dipak Rudrapaul, constable and one Birendra Debnath as per PM order made by SDM, Panisagar. After examination he found the following injuries:- "Multiple cut injuries over forehead (right side) one left ear, nose, chin and left upper limb and left leg besides small bruise over right forearm. Rigor mortise was present and the body was stout. He found deep cut injury over forehead right side measuring 4cm X2.5cm X 2 cm, deep cut injury over nose 3cm X 2cm X2 cm which extended up to eye, deep cut injury over right side of face 3cm X 2.5cm X 2cm and deep cut injury in chin region 2cm X 2.5cm X 1cm, deep cut injury over left ear measuring 3cm X 2.5cm X 2cm besides multiple cut injury in left upper limb in various sizes". He further deposed that "whole arm was almost chopped into two parts. Small cut injury was also present over left leg and all the internal organs were found congested". He gave the opinion that the death of the deceased was due to "haemorrhagic shock as a result of multiple sharp cut injury". He did not mention whether it was homicidal, accidental or suicidal but he could say on his report that it was a clear death of homicidal in nature. He proved his report as Exbt-3 and his signature thereon as Exhibit- 3/1. Since rigor mortise was present he could say that the time of death was within 24 hours from the time of his examination. He further deposed that in c/w the aforesaid GD and as per order of SDM he also conducted PM examination over the dead body of one Biprajit Das son of late Charitra Das aged about 40 years and on examination of the body he found:- "multiple cut injuries over left leg, left side of upper limb, right side of lower limb, right leg and right side of chest. Besides small bruise was also found in right forearm. There was deep cut injury found in the left side of upper neck measuring 7cm X 5cm X 2 cm extended upto left shoulder, the vital structure over the left shoulder was found cut. Multiple cut injury over right upper limb in various sizes were present. Forearm was almost chopped in two parts. He also found deep cut injury over left lower thigh measuring 4cm X 2cm X2.5cm. There were also deep injury of the left side of upper chest measuring 4cm X 2.5cm X 2.5 cm. Cut injury was also present over the right leg and in right ankle and also left elbow and right knee joint. All the other internal organs were congested". He furthermore told that after examination of the body he gave opinion that the death of the deceased was due to "haemorrhagic shock as a result of multiple sharp cut injury". He did not mention whether it was homicidal, accidental or suicidal. He could say on his report that it was a clear death of homicidal in nature and he proved his report which was submitted on 05-12- 2013 as exhibit- 4 and his signature thereon as exhibit- 4/1. Since rigor mortise was present he could say that the time of death was within 24 hours from the time of his examination. He also told that he conducted autopsy over the bodies at a time and examination started at about 3.40 hours which means it was 3.40 pm. Time taken in entire autopsy was not mentioned in his reports. Second body was also identified by the same persons. Both the reports were made on 05-12-2013. In their CHC there is a PM register and in that register after PM he did not enter his findings but he kept one document personally with him and subsequently basing on that personal documents he submitted the reports. He did not submit any preliminary report before disposal of the dead bodies. He had no cogent ground to state about the delay in submitting his report.

PW 12, Dr. Sabyasachi Nath deposed that on 11.12.2013 he being Scientific officer cum examiner of Biology Serology Division of Tripura SFSL, Narashinghar received one parcel with Exhibits from Sub-Divisional Officer, Panisagar vide No. 2814/SDPO/PNS./ND/2013, dated 09.12.2013 with reference to Panisagar P.S Case No. 73/13, dated 20.10.2013 through special messenger in their laboratory and they examined the Exhibits within the period 07.02.2014 to 31.03.2014. The parcel they received was one sealed piece board parcel covered with cloth bearing specimen seal impression containing exhibit A to Exhibit-G. He further told that Exbihit-A was a metallic hand „dao‟ having wooden handle wrapped with papers allegedly recovered from the P.O. Exhibit-B was another metallic hand „dao‟ having wooden handle wrapped with paper allegedly recovered from the P.O. Exhibit-C was one sealed paper envelop containing one sealed polythene packet having some mud emitting foul smell said to be blood stain earth seized from the P.O near the body of Biprojit Das. Exhibit-D another sealed paper envelope containing one sealed polythene packet having some mud emitting foul smell said to be blood stain earth collected from the P.O near the body of deceased Gita Das. Exhibit-E another sealed paper envelop containing one blue, yellow, red, colour torn half sleeve shirt said to be the wearing apparel of accused Debasish Das. Exhibit-F was one sealed paper envelop containing one sealed polythene packet having one blue colour cut half pant and one white colour 'ganji' which was subsequently remarked in their laboratory as F1 and F2 respectively said to be wearing apparels of decease Biprojit Das. Exhibit-G was one sealed paper envelop containing one sealed polythene paper having one deep red colour torn petty coat, one deepred colour torn blouse and one red, black, yellow, white colour printed torn Saree which were remarked as Exhibit-G1, Exhibit-G2 and Exhibit-G3 respectively in their laboratory said to be the wearing apparels of Gita Das. He also told that they examined the Exhibits by Tetramethyl Benzidini Test, Phenolphthalein Test, Takayama Test, Gel Diffusion Test and Absorption elution test and after examining he gave the following results:-

(1). Blood stain of human origin could be detected in all the Exhibits except Exhibit-G1 and G3. (2). Blood group of Exhibit A, B and F2 were detected to be 'A' group. (3). Blood group of Exhibit D was found to be 'O' group. (4). Two types of Blood groups could be determined in each of Exhibit-E and F1 and they were 'O' group and 'A' group. (5). Blood group of Exhibit-C and G2 could not be determined. (6). No blood stain could be detected in Exhibit G1 and G3. In his report he mentioned that Exhibits marked as Exhibit-G1, G2 and G3 got decomposed due to improper preservation in wet condition. He proved his report which bears his signature and also signature of their Director as Exhibit.18.

A bare reading of the evidence as recapitulated herein above, according to us, P.W.-9 is the key witness who had vividly given description of the incident being an eye-witness. The evidence of P.W.-9 is substantially supported by the evidence of P.W.-4, P.W.-6. The connection of the two „daos‟ recovered from

the place of occurrence have sufficiently established that the said two „daos‟ are the Exbt.- MO-I and Exbt.-MO-II. The blood stain found in the wearing apparels of the accused-persons are found to be matched with the blood group of the deceased-persons. The Doctor, P.W.-3 who conducted the post mortem in his evidence has categorically stated that there are multiple deep cut injuries on the bodies of both the deceased-persons.

One of the most vital witnesses, we found in the instant case is, P.W.-4, who has stated that at the time of incident he was in his house and suddenly he heard cries of human being saying „katiya lailo‟ and „mariaya lailo‟ and thereafter, a state of silence had enveloped the area. Being suspected of commission of an offence, he called nearby 5/6 persons and he could recollect the names of those persons as Hirendra Das, Dipak Das, Nirendra Ch. Das and Liptu Das. With them he proceeded towards the house of Debashis Das. When they went inside the house of Debashis Das, they found the bodies of Biprajit Das and his wife Gita Das lying spilled with blood. On being called Debashis was not found but his wife was found and he also saw two „daos‟, one was kept at the varandah and another was kept close to the body of Biprajit.

From the evidence of P.W.-4, the material facts, which come out, are that, he was the person who had rushed to the place of occurrence immediately after the incident and had seen the bodies of Biprajit Das and his wife Gita Das lying spilled with blood. He also had noticed one blood-stained „Kupa dao‟ with handle beside the body of Biprajit and another blood-stained similar „dao‟ in the verendah kept near the wife of the Debashis. Immediately, the said witness had made a telephone call to the police station and police arrived at the spot. He narrated the incident to the police. He has clearly stated that police prepared inquest report over the bodies of the deceased-persons and prepared two inquest report (Exbt-5 & Exbt-6) separately, where he put his signatures. He has also stated that he found multiple injuries on the persons of the deceased. He also identified the two „daos‟, marked as Exbt:-MO-I & Exbt:-MO-II, which were used as the weapons of offence.

Next, the evidence of P.W-6, Nipendra Das has substantiated the evidence of P.W.-4, who also had arrived at the spot immediately within five minutes of the incident after hearing quarrel from the house of Debashis Das and Biprajit Das. He has categorically stated that he heard Debashis inviting Biprajit to come out so that he could cut Biprajit. Biprajit replied that he would be coming out and if by cutting him Debashis felt pleasure, he could do so. Immediately after that he heard severe cries and thereafter he heard cries of female uttering „do not kill‟. The said witness called his brother Hirendra Das and also called other persons, namely, Ashutosh Sharma, Dulu Das @ Goutam Das and others and then proceeded towards the house of Debaishis and Biprajit. In between no sound came out from that house. After arriving he saw the body of Biprajit lying on the ground with multiple cut injuries without any movement and thereafter he noticed the body of the wife of Biprajit, Gita Das was lying with multiple injuries in front of Biprajit. He also noticed two blood-stained „kupa dao‟, one near the body of Biprajit and another was kept near Khana Das, wife of Debashis, who was standing on the Verandah. He identified the two „daos‟ as Exbt-MO-I and Exbt-MO-II, which were used as the weapons of offence.

P.W.-5, Sribash Das was one of the persons who gathered at the spot immediately after the incident and he also noticed the dead bodies of the two victims and also two blood-stained „daos‟.

P.W.-11, Rupendra Debbarma, investigating officer of the case deposed that he seized a „dao‟ found near the body of the Biprajit by a seizure list at about 03.35 hours and said „dao‟ was blood-stained, he proved the said seizure list as Exbt.-7/2. At about 02.35 hours, he seized another „dao‟ which was about 1 ½ cubit in length from the varandah of Debashis Das which was also blood-stained and he proved the seizure list as Exbt-8/2.

P.W-12, Dr. Sabyasachi Nath, being the scientific officer-cum-examiner of Biology and Serology division of Tripura SFSL deposed as follows:-

"10. Details of parcel and exhibits received: One sealed pitch board parcel being covered with cloth bearing specimen seal impressions contained the following exhibits:-

i) Exhibit-A: One metallic hand dao bearing wooden handle being wrapped with paper, said to be seized from the P.O.

ii) Exhibit-B: One metallic hand dao bearing wooden handle being wrapped with paper, said to be seized from the P.O.

iii) Exhibit-C: One sealed paper envelope contained one sealed polythene packet having some mud emitting foul smell, said to be blood stained earth seized from the P.O., near the body of deceased, Biprajit Das.

iv) Exhibit-D: One sealed paper envelope contained one sealed polythene packet having some mud emitting foul smell, said to be blood stained earth seized from the P.O., near the body of deceased, Gita Das.

v) Exhibit-E: One sealed paper envelope contained one blue-yellow-red color torn half sleeve shirt, said to be wearing apparel of A/P Debashis Das.

vi) Exhibit-F; One sealed paper envelope contained one sealed polythene packet having one blue colour cut half pant and one white color ganjee, subsequently marked in laboratory as F1 and F2 respectively, said to be wearing apparels of deceased, Biprajit Das.

vii) Exhibit-G; One sealed paper envelope contained one sealed polythene packet having one deep red color torn petticoat, one deep red color torn blouse and one red-black-yellow white color printed torn saree, subsequently marked in laboratory as G1, G2 and G3 respectively, said to be wearing apparels of deceased, Gita Das.

Result:

i) Blood stain of human origin could be detected in the exhibits marked as A,B,C,D,E,F1,F2 and G2.

ii) Blood group of Exhibits marked as A, B and F2 could be determined as A group.

iii) Blood group of the exhibit marked as D could be determined as O group.

iv) Two types of blood groups could be determined in each of the exhibits marked as E and F1; and the blood groups are O group and A Group.

v) Blood Group of the exhibits marked as C and G2 could not be determined.

vi) No blood stain could be detected in the exhibits marked as G1 and G3."

From the above examination report, it is found that Exbt-E indicates the wearing apparels of the accused-appellant, Debashis Das and the Exbt-F indicates the wearing apparels of the deceased-Biprajit Das. During his examination, the said witness P.W.-12 has deposed that the blood group O & A of the deceased-persons were detected in the said two „daos‟, marked as Exbt.-MO-I and Exbt.- MO-II. Blood group of Exbt-G and Exbt-C2 could not be determined and no blood stain could be detected in Exbt-G1 and Exbt-G3. In his report, he mentioned that exhibits marked as Exbt-G1, G2 and G3 got decomposed due to improper preservation in the wet condition. P.W.-12 had proved his report which bears his signature and also the signature of the Director-cum-Chemical Examiner as Exbt-18.

On meticulous scrutiny of the entire evidence and materials on record, we find that both the accused Debashis and deceased-Biprajit used to engage in frequent quarrel. There was enmity between them in regard to the issue of land and for that matter some meetings were also held at the initiative of the elder persons of the village. On the fateful night, the accused-Debashis had invited Biprajit to come out of the house so that he could kill him. Biprajit, accordingly, said that if Debashis would be happy by cutting him, then he would be coming out. After a few minutes, the wife of Biprajit, Gita Das came out of their hut. Thereafter, P.W.-9, Anjali Das, daughter of the deceased-persons also came out with a lighted torch and saw the two accused-persons, Debashis and his wife Khana Das were giving severe blows by „dao‟ in their hands upon the persons of the deceased. After hearing quarrel and subsequent severe cries, P.W.-4, P.W.-5 and P.W.-6 came out of their houses along with other persons. After reaching the house of Debashis and Biprajit they found Biprajit and his wife lying spilled with blood with severe multiple cut injuries. They also found two blood-stained „daos‟. It was those two „daos‟ which were used as weapons of offence as consistently deposed by P.W.-9 and substantially corroborated by forensic examination and also on the basis of evidence led by P.W.-4, P.W.-5 and P.W.-6. Police arrived at the spot on receipt of telephonic information in regard to the incident by P.W.-4. That information was entered in the general dairy and after such entry the police came into the place of occurrence and found the dead bodies. The police made inquest over the dead bodies in the place of occurrence itself and seized the wearing apparels of the deceased and also two blood-stained „daos‟.

Thus, starting from the fact of quarrel followed by severe cries coupled with the evidence of P.W.-9 as well as evidence of P.W.-4, P.W.-5 and P.W.-6, who arrived at the place of occurrence immediately after the incident and the use of material objects seized from the place of occurrence only point towards the guilt of the accused-persons. There is no other scope to utter any other hypothesis other than the guilt committed by the accused-appellants behind the murder of Biprajit and his wife Gita. There is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of P.W.-4. P.W.-5 and P.W.-6 who arrived at the spot just immediately after the incident because they are the witness of res-judicata.

Next, we find no merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellants that the murder were caused out of sudden quarrel and provocation for the reason that the accused-Debashis was pre-meditated to commit the crime. The accused-Debashis had given enough provocation forcing Biprajit, the deceased, to come out of his hut and threatened to kill him and entered into quarrel and subsequently had dealt severe blows to Biprajit; his wife Khana Das, another accused-appellants in the instant case, also actively participated in the crime resulting multiple injuries on the persons of the two deceaseds aided by two „daos‟.

Lastly, on cumulative reading of evidence we may unhesitantly arrive at a finding that the evidence led by the P.W.-4, P.W.-5 and P.W.-6 and the seizure of two blood stained „daos‟ from the place of occurrence have concretized the evidence of P.W.-9, the daughter of the deceased-persons, who according to us witnessed the incident with the help of lighted torch. After chronological analysis of the entire episode and the chain of circumstances, according to us, none of the link is missed which leads us to draw the only hypothesis of guilt of the accused-appellants and no other.

Having held so, we don‟t find any merit in the instant appeal filed by the accused-appellants and accordingly, the instant criminal appeal stands dismissed.

Send back the L.C. records.