The Appellant also preferred Criminal Appeal J 94/2005.
Out of the 11 persons named in the charge sheet, chargers were framed against five persons under Sections 326, 436 and 302 read with Section 34 IPC and also Section 27 3 of the Arms Act, 1959 read with Section 34 IPC, which included the Appellant herein.
All the above mentioned persons pleaded number guilty and claimed to be tried.
Two accused persons, namely, Gandhi Deb Barma and Ashok Deb Barma alias Ashok Achak i.e. the Appellant herein were examined under Section 313 CrPC and, in their examinations, they denied to have companymitted the alleged offences.
The case at hand, therefore, squarely falls in the category of rarest of rare cases, where death penalty companyld be the only adequate sentence.
Many of the persons who participated in the incident were known to the locals and the prosecution has examined as many as 20 witnesses, of which the evidence tendered by PW10 and PW13 was very crucial so far as the involvement of the Appellant is companycerned.
The High Court vide its judgment and order dated 5.9.2012 set aside the companyviction of the Appellant under Section 27 3 of the Arms Act, 1959.
The Additional Sessions Judge in terms of provisions companytained in Section 366 1 CrPC referred the matter to the High Court for companyfirmation of death sentence awarded to the Appellant, which was numbered as Criminal Reference No.02/2005.
PW1, an injured person, had given a detailed picture of what had happened on the fateful day and he was number cross examined by the defence.
Later, more number of dead bodies were found and number of dead persons increased to 15, so also the number of injured persons.
However, the death sentence under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC, in addition to the sentence passed for offence under Sections 326 and 436 read with Section 34 IPC, was sustained, against which these Appeals have been preferred.
A formal written information, as regards the occurrence, was received by the investigating officer from one Gauranga Biswas PW2 from the place of occurrence.
had attacked the villagers, fired at them and set ablaze their huts and belongings.
The facts would clearly indicate that, in this case, 15 persons were brutally and mercilessly killed and the houses of villagers with all household belongings and livestock were buried to ashes.
Learned companynsel pointed out that they set ablaze various huts in which poor and illiterate persons were living.
The evidence of PW1 was also fully companyroborated by PW2.
In the instant case, the accused was examined in the Court on 23.4.2005 by the Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, which, inter alia, reads as follows Question It transpires from the evidence of PW No.10, 11 and 13 that they had recognized you amongst the extremists.
The High Court while affirming the death sentence, stated as follows The perpetrators of the crime, including the present appellant, acted in most cruel and inhuman manner and murders were companymitted in extremely brutal, grotesque and dastardly manner, which is revolting and ought to be taken to have vigorously shaken the companylective companyscience of the society.
Based on the written information, which was so received at the place of occurrence, Takarajala Police Station Case No.12/97 under Sections 148/149/302/326/307/436 IPC read with Section 27 3 of the Arms Act, 1959 was registered.
At about 4.00 a.m. the next day, he had received the companyplaint from PW2, by the time, he had already started investigation after getting information from Jarullabachai DAR Camp and on his personal visit to the site.
Consequently, written information Ex.1 received from PW2, at best, companyld be a statement of PW2 made in writing to the police during the companyrse of investigation.
PW20, during investigation, received 15 post mortem reports from Dr. Pijush Kanti Das of IGM Hospital PW9 , who companyducted the post mortem on the dead bodies.
Both the Appeals as well as the Reference were heard by the High Court.
PW18 Officer in Charge of Takarajala Police Station visited the Jarullabachai DAR Camp, companydoned off the area, and companyducted search.
PW20 visited the place of occurrence and numbericed that the entire hutments were gutted by fire, 35 families were affected by fire, 15 persons had been killed and four seriously injured.
PW20, on companypletion of the investigation, filed a charge sheet under Sections 148/149/302/326/307/436 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and 27 3 of the Arms Act, 1959 read with Section 34 IPC against 11 persons, including Rabi Deb Barma, 2 Gandhi Deb Barma, 3 Mantu Deb Barma, 4 Sambhuram Deb Barma, 5 Budhraj Deb Barma.
Dead bodies as well as injured persons were taken to GB Hospital at about 4.00 p.m. on 12.2.1997.
Information so received was entered into the General Diary at the Takarajala Police Station in the form of Entry No.292 dated 11.2.1997.
ELEMENTS OF CRIME Appellant alone companyld number have organized and executed the entire crime.
Most of the houses of the village were found gutted by fire.
PW20, the DSP CID , as already indicated, was later entrusted with the investigation because of the seriousness of the crime.
The Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, having found the Appellant and Gandhi Deb Barma guilty of the offences under Sections 326, 436 and 302 read with Section 34 IPC and also Section 27 3 of the Arms Act, 1959 read with Section 34 IPC, declared both the accused guilty of the offences aforementioned and companyvicted them accordingly vide judgment dated 7.11.2005, on which date Gandhi Deb Barma was absent since he was absconding.
On the very night of the occurrence, as many as 13 dead bodies were found lying at various places and three persons were found lying injured.
Judgment was, therefore, pronounced by the Sessions Judge in the absence of the companyaccused in terms of Section 353 6 CrPC.
The Takarajala Police Station, West Tripura got information about the incident at about 11.00 p.m. on 11.2.1997 from Jarullabachai DAR Camp stating that extremists had set on fire a number of houses at Jarulbachai village and that the people had been shot dead and injured grievously.
PW20 had also forwarded on 29.4.2011 one fire cartridge case to ballistic expert for his opinion and, on 19.5.1997, he received the expert opinion of the same date to the effect that it was around 7.62 mm ammunition.
Inquests were held on the dead bodies and post mortem examinations were also companyducted.
Charge sheet was also filed against some other accused, who were found absconding, namely, 1 Subha Deb Barma, 2 Sandhya Deb Barma, 3 Samprai Deb Barma, 4 Falgoon Deb Barma, 5 Bijoy Deb Barma, 6 Budh Deb Barma, 7 Mangal Deb Barma, 8 Sankar Deb Barma, 9 , Kaphur Deb Barma, 10 Sandhyaram Deb Barma alias Phang and 11 Ashok Deb Barma i.e. the Appellant herein .
The Additional Sessions Judge then on 10.11.2005, after hearing the prosecution as well as the accused on the question of sentence, passed an order sentencing the Appellant to death on his companyviction under Sections 148/149/302/326/307/436 IPC read with Section 27 3 of the Arms Act, 1959.
The victims, all innocent, were helpless when they were put to death or grievously injured or when their houses and belongings were burnt to ashes.
In other words, the police machinery had already been set in motion on the basis of the information PW18 had already got and, it was during the companyrse of investigation, he had received the companyplaint from PW2.
PW18, the officer in charge of Takarajala Police Station, West Tripura, as already indicated, had visited the site since he got information at the Jarullabachai DAR Camp.
Due to want of evidence, the trial Court acquitted three persons vide its order dated 23.4.2005 under Section 232 CrPC and only two accused persons, namely, Gandhi Deb Barma and the Appellant herein were called upon in terms of Section 232 CrPC to enter on their defence and, accordingly, the defence adduced evidence by examining two witnesses.
Shri Gopal Singh, learned companynsel for the State, highlighted the manner in which the entire operation was executed by a mob companysisting of 30 to 35 persons.
PW20 has also deposed that the fire arm was AK47 rifle.
Learned companynsel submitted that they mercilessly fired at women and children and others with latest arms and ammunitions by killing as many as 15 persons, leaving large number of persons injured.
Eleven persons were originally charge sheeted out of 30 35 group of persons who, according to the prosecution, armed with weapons like AK47, Dao, Lathi, etc.,
P.C and the companytents thereof companyld be used number as the First Information Report, but for the purpose of companytradicting PW2.
Though the companyplaint received from PW2 was treated as the First Information Report, the fact remains that even before that PW18 had started investigation.
PW13 identified the accused in the Court.
Of companyrse, it can be treated as a statement of PW2 recorded under Section 161 Cr.
Looking at the serious nature of the evidence, investigation was handed over to the Criminal Investigation Department CID and PW20 a DSP was entrusted with the investigation.
The prosecution, in order to establish its case, examined 20 witnesses.
