THE LAWS - Licensed to - (Sowmya Bhattacharjee - 11334) Page 1 of 5

LAWS(GAU) 1976 2 5
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Coram :- BAHARUL ISLAM, D. PATHAK, JJ.
Decided on 1976 February 04
Criminal Appeal No. 45(J) of 1971
Tubu Chetia
VERSUS
State Of Assam,

Advocates:
K. B. ROHTAGI, V. K. JAIN, A. C. DEKA

[-] Referred Judgments (1)

MAHMOOD VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [AIR 1976 SC 69] [REFERRED TO]

[-] Cited At (1)

ACHANTA RAMA KRISHNA VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, REP BY PUBLIFE

INSURANCE [LAWS(APH)-2006-7-154][REFERRED]

[-] Referred Acts:

INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 , S. 302 , S. 84

Citations:
CRLJ 1976 0 1416, LAWS(GAU) 1976 2 5,

Expert View:

A.

"(1) A cut would 3" X 1" on right side of occipital area starting 1
medial to right ear and running upwards and inwards and cutting
the occipital bone, brain crushed__ . "(1) Cut wound 5" X 2" starting
3" above the chin and running upwards and inwards cutting the
mandible eyebrow zygomatic bone on right side__ .

B.

In the opinion of the witness, all the injuries were ante -mortem and
the woman died of haemorrhage, fracture of bones, liver punctured,
lung punctured, and in his opinion, the injuries were sufficient, in
normal course of nature, to cause the death of the injured
person__ . Kalita, the learned counsel appearing as amicus curiae
for the appellant, submits that in this case the guilt of the accused
has not been established beyond reasonable doubt, inasmuch as he
submits that there is a missing link in the evidence__ .

C.

Regent Computronics Pvt. Ltd.

THE LAWS - Licensed to - (Sowmya Bhattacharjee - 11334) Page 2 of 5

In our opinion, therefore, there is no doubt that the injuries on the

woman and the child were homicidal in nature and were the causes
of the deaths of the two persons and that the two persons were
murdered__ Therefore, the apparently missing link is replaced by
his silence, and, in our opinion, there is no doubt that it was the
appellant who killed these two persons__ Ganguli who held the post
-mortem examination on the dead body of the child, was examined
before the committing Magistrate, and his evidence was tendered in
the Sessions Court__ His evidence is that the held the post -mortem
examination on the dead body of a minor child of the age of about 1
years and found the following injuries on his person__ On the same
day, he held post -mortem examination on the dead body of Ghangri
Chetia, wife of the deceased__ In the circumstances, it must be held
that the appellant has failed to establish insanity in order to get the
protection under Section 84 of the Penal Code__

D.

THE alternative submission of learned counsel is that the appellant

was insane at the time of the commission of the murders. -- IN the
result, this appeal fails and is dismissed.

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. THE Appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of the Penal Code by the Sessions Judge,
Lakhimpur. The appeal is from jail.

2. THE facts of the case are as follows : - On 17.6.1970 a first information report was lodged at
Pengari Police Out -Post and it was sent to, and received at, Digboi Police Station on 18.6.1970. It
was stated in that first information report that on that day, namely 17.6.1970, the appellant
caused the death of his wife and a minor son, in his own house after closing the door from inside.
The police registered a case and after investigation, submitted a change -sheet under Section
302, I.P.C. Eventually he was committed to the Court of Session where also the charge under
Section 302 was maintained. The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge. His plea was one of
insanity at the relevant time.

3. DR . H.N. Ganguli who held the post -mortem examination on the dead body of the child, was
examined before the committing Magistrate, and his evidence was tendered in the Sessions
Court. His evidence is that the held the post -mortem examination on the dead body of a minor
child of the age of about 1 years and found the following injuries on his person.

"(1) A cut would 3" X 1" on right side of occipital area starting 1 medial to right
ear and running upwards and inwards and cutting the occipital bone, brain
crushed.

(2) One punctured wound 1 " X " about 1" below injury No. 1, punctured the
medulla ob longata.

Regent Computronics Pvt. Ltd.

THE LAWS - Licensed to - (Sowmya Bhattacharjee - 11334) Page 3 of 5

(3) One punctured would 1" X " on left lumber area 2 " above right hip bone
through which intestine bulges out but it was not punctured."

On internal examination, the witness found the brain crushed on the occipital
area and medulla ob longeta. In his opinion all the injuries were ante -mortem
and the child died of haemorrhage from bone fracture and brain injury. On the
same day, he held post -mortem examination on the dead body of Ghangri
Chetia, wife of the deceased. He found the following six injuries on her dead
body.

"(1) Cut wound 5" X 2" starting 3" above the chin and running upwards and
inwards cutting the mandible eyebrow zygomatic bone on right side.

(2) Cut wound 2" X 1 " on front side of face cutting the supra orbital bone and
nasal bones.

(3) Cut wound 2" X 1" starting " above right eye -brow running upwards and
inwards and cutting the frontal bone on right side.

(4) One punctured wound 2" X 1" on right side of chest 2 " below right nipple
puncturing the upper surface of the liver.

(5) One punctured wound 1 " X " on left side of chest 3" below the left nipple
puncturing the upper lobe of the left lung.

(6) Cut wound 1 " x " on back side of left forearm at its middle third."

In the opinion of the witness, all the injuries were ante -mortem and the woman
died of haemorrhage, fracture of bones, liver punctured, lung punctured, and in
his opinion, the injuries were sufficient, in normal course of nature, to cause the
death of the injured person. In our opinion, therefore, there is no doubt that the
injuries on the woman and the child were homicidal in nature and were the
causes of the deaths of the two persons and that the two persons were
murdered.

There is no eye -witness in the case. It depends on circumstantial evidence.

4. P .W. 1 Rajbor Chetia is the elder brother of the appellant. His deposition is that he lives
separately from his brother, the appellant, who was living with this wife Chengeri and four
children. The age of the youngest child was about 1 " years. He deposes that the accused had
delirium for about 2/3 days before the occurrence. That on the date of occurrence, he went to the
neighbouring temple to offer some prasads for recovery of the appellant. Then hearing some hue
and cry in the house of the appellant, he returned. P.Ws. 2, 3 and two or three other persons also
arrived there. They found the door of the room of the appellant closed from inside. They
requested the appellant to open the door and come out. The appellant then opened the door and
came out with a spear in his hand and rushed at them, whereupon they ran away to their village.
The appellant entered into the house of P.W. 1 where he was apprehended and kept tied there. He

Regent Computronics Pvt. Ltd.

THE LAWS - Licensed to - (Sowmya Bhattacharjee - 11334) Page 4 of 5

has proved material. Ext. 1, an axe, and material Ext. II, a spear, which were seized by the Police
Officer who has stated that they belonged to the appellant. He is also witness to the seizure -list,
Exhibits 2 and 3 corroborate P.W. 1.

5. THE law is well settled that in order to convict an accused on circumstantial evidence, it must
be proved that the innocence of the accused is incompatible with the prosecution case. In the
instant case the pieces of evidence against the appellant are : - (1) that he was found inside his
room all alone with the dead bodies of the two deceased; (2) that the door was closed from
inside; and (3) that he had a spear in his hand when he had come out on being asked by P.Ws. 1,
2 and others.

6. SRI . Kalita, the learned counsel appearing as amicus curiae for the appellant, submits that in
this case the guilt of the accused has not been established beyond reasonable doubt, inasmuch as
he submits that there is a missing link in the evidence. His submission is that there is no
evidence of bloodstains on the weapons seized in the case, and in support of his contention he
cites the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Mahmood v. State of U.P., reported in AIR
1976 SC 69, in which it has been laid down by their Lordships that no conviction can be based on
circumstantial evidence if there be a missing link. In the instant case it appears there is a missing
link, namely, that there is no evidence to show that the weapons which have been alleged to have
been used in killing these two persons were stained with blood. But in our mind, the doubt is
removed by another circumstance, namely, that the appellant, being a very near relation of the
two deceased found all alone inside a closed room with his wife and child murdered he was silent
when he was challenged by P.Ws. 1 and 2. It was expected of him to explain the circumstances, if
somebody else murdered them. His silence is eloquent about his guilt. Naturally, if somebody
else killed those two persons, either in his presence or in his absence, he ought to have reported
that facts to P.Ws. 1 and 2 and 3. But he did not do so. Therefore, the apparently missing link is
replaced by his silence, and, in our opinion, there is no doubt that it was the appellant who killed
these two persons.

7. THE alternative submission of learned counsel is that the appellant was insane at the time of
the commission of the murders. Section 84 of the Penal Code provides :

"Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it,
by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the
act, of that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law."

When an accused takes the plea of the general exceptions under the Penal Code,
the burden is upon him to establish that plea, although he is not required to
establish it beyond reasonable doubt. Any kind of unsoundness of mind or
insanity is not enough for legal purpose. There is great difference between
medical insanity and legal insanity. Unsoundness of mind as contemplated by
Section 84, I.P.C. is legal insanity which means the state of mind in which an
accused is incapable of knowing the nature of his act or that he is incapable of
knowing that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law. In other words,
his cognitive faculties are such that he does not know what he has done or what

Regent Computronics Pvt. Ltd.

THE LAWS - Licensed to - (Sowmya Bhattacharjee - 11334) Page 5 of 5

will follow from his act. In the instant case, from the evidence of the P.Ws. 1, 2
and 3 there is no doubt that the appellant had some sort of mental disorder at
the relevant time. But the question is whether it was legal insanity so as to give
the accused the benefit of Section 84. Legal insanity of the appellant is negatived
by the following circumstances : (1) When P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 approached his room
and asked him to open the door and come out, he did open the door and came
out. This shows that his cognitive faculties were not completely lost. He
understood that somebody asked him to open the door and come out, and he
responded, although he came out with the spear in his hand (2) The second
circumstance is that P.W. 2 immediately after the occurrence found the appellant
sitting leaning near the door, as if sleeping, with the spear in hand. He and the
other persons told him that they had not come to assault or arrest him. He then
threw away the spear. This shows that when the P.Ws. approached him not as
assailants he disarmed himself. (3) The third circumstance is that when P.W. 5,
the Assistant Sub -Inspector of Police, put soma questions to him at the time of
his arrest, no reply was given. But when he was going to take him into custody,
the appellant protested. This also shows that he was not completely insane. In
the circumstances, it must be held that the appellant has failed to establish
insanity in order to get the protection under Section 84 of the Penal Code.

8. IN the result, this appeal fails and is dismissed.

Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.

Regent Computronics Pvt. Ltd.