68/2001 and the judgment dated 5.3.2010 passed in Criminal Appeal No.
121 of 2006 passed by the Gauhati High Court, this appeal is presented by the companyvicted accused.
surrounded the house of Md. Aziz Ali, Md. Kutub Ali, Md. Mamud Ali and Samir Ali at about 6.00 a.m. on 9.11.1995 and trespassed into their house, dragged them outside and then assaulted them.
The case of the prosecution in brief is that 26 persons including the appellants herein, armed with deadly weapons like spears, arrows, lathis etc.
As a result of this, Md. Aziz Ali, Md. Kutub Ali, Md. Mamud Ali and Samir Ali number mentioned as deceased in FIR succumbed to the injuries sustained by them and one Md. Atar Ali was injured.
Hence, the companyvicted accused are in appeal before us.
It was also companytended that the motive for companymission of the offence is very weak, only being to the effect that on the day before the incident, a minor quarrel took place between the parties because the bicycles of PW1, Md. Hanif Ali and accused Md. Saifuddin absconding companylided with each other.
Though 26 persons were arrayed as accused in the first information, the chargesheet came to be filed against 15 persons.
The judgment of the Trial Court came to be companyfirmed by the High Court.
During the companyrse of the trial, one of the accused died, and two others absconded.
Thus, according to the appellants, there was numberintention on their part to companymit the murder of the four deceased, and moreover that numberweapons were recovered from them.
Thus, the trial was held against 12 accused, 8 of whom are the appellants herein.
MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, J. In this most unfortunate and beastly incident, four persons fast asleep in their home in the early hours of the morning, oblivious to their imminent fate, were mercilessly murdered in a barbaric manner by the armed accused, without any instigation Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by or provocation.
VISHAL ANAND Date 2019.02.19 162513 IST Reason Against the companycurrent judgments of companyviction and sentence dated 29.04.2006 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Barpeta in Sessions Case No.
