Gauhati High Court
Sanjay Rajowar vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 30 July, 2025
Author: S.K. Medhi
Bench: S.K. Medhi
Page No.# 1/114
GAHC010007962021
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.A./54/2021
SANJAY RAJOWAR
S/O- LATE BABU RAJOWAR, R/O- MAJOR LINE, TEOK TEA ESTATE, P.O.
AND P.S. TEOK, DIST.- JORHAT, ASSAM, PIN- 785112.
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM.
2:MANOJ GOGOI
S/O- LATE BADAN CH. GOGOI
SENIOR MANAGER
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O. AND P.S. TEOK
DIST.- JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN- 785635
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S BORTHAKUR, MR. U K DEKA
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MS J SAIKIA (R-2),MR. M K DAS (R-2),MS Z
ANJUM (R-2),MR. U S BORA (R-2)
Linked Case : Crl.A./61/2021
SANJIB RAJOWAR AND 23 ORS.
Page No.# 2/114
S/O LATE JATIN RAJOWAR
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
2: RATUL RAJOWAR @ HASIM
S/O LATE JAGAT RAJOWAR
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
3: BABLU RAJOWAR
S/O LATE LALA RAJOWAR
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
4: BIJOY RAJOWAR
S/O SIBA RAJOWAR
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
5: RINKU MAJHI @ BATU
S/O HARI MAJHI
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
Page No.# 3/114
ASSAM
PIN-785112
6: SIBCHARAN MAHALI @ BATU
S/O SUNU MAHALI
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
7: SANJAY RAJOWAR @ TAKLU
S/O LATE GOPI RAJOWAR
R/O PIPOL LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
8: KALICHARAN MAHALI @ NAINA
S/O SRI SUNU MAHALI
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
9: SIBA MAHILI @ BIJIT MAHILI
S/O LATE BIJLAL MAHALI
R/O PIPOL LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
10: RAHUL RAJOWAR
S/O SRI TEPURAM RAJOWAR
R/O NO. 3 LINE
Page No.# 4/114
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
11: AJOY MAJHI @ TUTU
S/O JAGAT MAJHI
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
12: SURESH RAJOWAR
S/O LATE RAMESH RAJOWAR
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
13: UPENDRA BHUMIJ @ KISHOR
S/O LATE DEBESWAR BHUMIJ
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
14: ANIL MAJHI
S/O LATE LALIT MAJHI
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
Page No.# 5/114
15: BOLIN RAJOWAR
S/O LATE MADAN RAJOWAR
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
16: DIPAK RAJOWAR
S/O LATE NAGEN RAJOWAR
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
17: MILAN RAJOWAR
S/O LATE LALA RAJOWAR
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
18: MISILAL MAJHI @ JABRA
S/O LATE RAMAI MAJHI
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
19: DEBESWAR RAJOWAR @ DEBA
S/O LATE JOGESWAR RAJOWAR
R/O NO-3 LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
Page No.# 6/114
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
20: KARTIK BHUMIJ
S/O LATE SIBU BHUMIJ
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
21: RAMESWAR BHUMIJ @ RAMESH
S/O SRI BISHU BHUMIJ
R/O PIPOL LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
22: KALANAG MAJHI
S/O LATE LODHRO MAJHI
R/O HARUCHARAI
P.S.-PULIBOR
C/O SMT. SANTI MAJHI
W/O SRI SAIBA MAJHI
NO. 12 LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
23: MANOJ MAJHI
S/O LATE PUNA MAJHI
R/O PIPOL LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
Page No.# 7/114
ASSAM
PIN-785112
24: RINKU BAKTI
S/O RAMNATH BAKTI
R/O MAJOR LINE
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O.-TEOK
P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785112
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
ASSAM
2:MANOJ GOGOI
S/O LATE BADAN CH. GOGOI
SENIOR MANAGER
TEOK TEA ESTATE
P.O. AND P.S.-TEOK
DIST-JORHAT
ASSAM
PIN-785635
------------
Advocate for : MR S BORTHAKUR
Advocate for : PP
ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR.
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K. MEDHI
HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG
Date of hearing : 18.03.2025, 19.03.2025, 25.03.2025 & 26.03.2025.
Date of judgment : 30.07.2025.
JUDGEMENT AND ORDER (CAV)
(Marli Vankung, J)
Page No.# 8/114
Since the Crl.A. No. 54/2021 and Crl.A. No. 61/2021 are arising out of the same
judgment and order, both the criminal appeals are heard and disposed of by a common
judgment and order.
Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the appellant Sanjoy Rajowar in Crl.A. No.
54/2021 and also the learned counsel for the appellants in Crl.A. No. 61/2021 namely, Sanjib
Rajowar, Ratul Rajowar, Bablu Rajowar, Bijoy Rajowar, Rinku Majhi @ Batu, Sibcharan Mahali
@ Batu, Sanjay Rajowar @ Taklu, Kalicharan Mahali @ Naina, Siba Mahali @ Bijit Mahili,
Rahul Rajowar, Ajoy Majhi @ Tutu, Suresh Rajowar, Upendra Bhumiji @ Kishor, Anil
Majhi,Bolin Rajowar, Dipak Rajowar, Milan Rajowar, Misilal Majhi @ Jabra, Debeswar Rajowar
@ Deba Kartik Bhumiji, Rameshwar Bhumiji @ Ramesh, Kalanag Majhi, Manoj Majhi, Rinku
Bakti who were convicted under Sections 302/352/353/148/149 IPC r/w Section 4 of the
AMPS & MSI Act, 2011. Sanjoy Rajowar in Crl.A. No. 54/2021 was convicted under Section
302 IPC and also under Sections 302/352/353/148/149 IPC r/w Section 4 of the AMPS & MSI
Act, 2011 by the Judgment & Order dated 12.10.2020 passed by the learned Sessions Judge,
Jorhat, Assam passed in Sessions Case No. 157(J-T)/90 (GR Case No. 3191/90). Also heard
Ms. S. Jahan, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondents in both the appeals
and Mr. M.K. Das, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 in Crl.A. No. 54/2021 and Mr. D.
Talukdar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 in Crl.A. No. 61/2021.
2. The prosecution story in brief is that, on 31.08.2019 at 10:10 PM, one Shri Manoj
Gogoi, Senior Manager of Teok Tea Estate, Jorhat, Assam lodged a First Information Report
before the Officer-in-charge, Teok Police Station, Jorhat to the effect that on 31.08.2019, the
Doctor of the hospital/dispensary of the Teok Tea Estate was killed by a mob. As per the FIR
lodged by Sh. Manoj Gogoi, Senior Manager of Teok Tea Estate at around 2:35 PM, one
Samra Majhi (30) S/o Late Jagan Majhi of Major Line of Teok Tea Estate slipped in the
bathroom and received head injury. At around 3:15 PM, he was brought to Teok Tea Estate
Hospital by 6 to 7 persons. When he was brought to the hospital, the dresser on duty, Shri
Subhash Rajowar rushed on his bike to bring the nurse Smt. Ranjula Hazarika Bora to the
hospital. When she arrived at the hospital, she immediately informed the Medical Officer, Dr.
Page No.# 9/114
Deben Dutta over phone and as per the direction of the Medical Officer, the nurse
administered one Dexona Injection. Soon, Dr. Deben Dutta arrived at the hospital and started
treatment with nebulizer on the patient. By then a mob of around 40 persons gathered at the
hospital creating ruckus. They assaulted and threatened Mr. Maresh Robidas, Chowkidar of
the hospital who tried to pacify the mob. The mob threatened Smt. Ranjula Hazarika Bora,
nurse at the hospital and also restrained Subhash Rajowar, dresser of the hospital from
protecting the Doctor who was being subjected to brutal assault by the mob. The mob
confined Dr. Deben Dutta in a room and started brutally assaulting him with fists and blows
with wooden leg of a table and sharp glass blades extracted by breaking the windows of the
hospital. The Doctor started bleeding profusely. The Welfare Officer of the Teok Tea Estate,
Jibon Kurmi, Mukhyajyoti Barua, Asst. Manager and Manoj Gogoi, Manager soon reached the
hospital. The crowd had grown to 200 to 250 persons. The mob continued to engage in
damage and destruction of the hospital property and continued to assault Dr. Deben Dutta.
On receiving information, the police from Teok Police Station had reached the spot but the
police were outnumbered and could not do their duty. No heed was paid to the Executive
Magistrate who could not perform his duty to maintain law and order. The ambulance was
called for, however the mob did not allow access to the ambulance. After reinforcement of the
police, Samara Majhi and Dr. Deben Dutta were shifted to the Jorhat Medical College and
Hospital. Dr. Deben Dutta had declared brought dead at the hospital.
3. Due to the brutal physical assault by the unlawful mob, serious injuries by giving fists
and blows, assault with wooden leg of the table and injuries through sharp glass blades taken
from the window, Dr. Deben Dutta died. The names of the person who allegedly caused the
death of Dr. Deben Dutta were listed in the FIR consisting of 30 persons. The FIR was
accordingly registered as Teok Police Case No. 434/2019 under Section
302/341/342/427/506/143/144/147/148 r/w Sectiion 149/186 IPC r/w Section 4 of the Assam
Medical Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and
Damage to Property) Act, 2011.
4. It is also seen that prior to the lodging of the FIR, the OC Teok Police Station received
Page No.# 10/114
information about the incident over phone and the same was recorded in GD Entry No. 526
dated 31.08.2019 at around 4:08 PM.
5. During investigation, the case IO visited the place of occurrence and examined the
witnesses. The IO also recorded the statement of 7 (seven) witnesses recorded under Section
164 CrPC. He had made a prayer before the Court under Clause 7(e) of the Witness
Protection Scheme, 2018 for protection of the 7 (seven) witnesses by concealing the identity
as the witnesses received threat to their lives and the same was allowed by the Court. He got
the inquest and autopsy on the dead body of Dr. Deben Dutta conducted at JMCH. He also
sent the viscera of Dr. Deben Dutta collected during the autopsy for chemical examination at
Forensic Science Laboratory (hereinafter referred to as FSL) Kahilipara, Guwahati. He also
took photographs in the place of occurrence and seized some broken glasses lying scattered
at the PO and also seized one chair used by Dr. Deben Dutta, which was sent to the FSL. The
report of the above was then collected. He arrested the accused persons and forwarded them
to the Court, wherein Test Identification Parade (TIP) of the accused persons was done. The
fingerprint of one accused namely, Sanjoy Rajowar was done along with the broken glass
piece with chance fingerprints. The same was sent for examination at FSL, Kahilipar,
Guwahati. The required records were received and on completion of the investigation, the
case IO found well established the case under Section 302/341/342/427/506/186/143/
144/147/148/149/109 of IPC r/w Section 4 of the AMSP & MSI Act. Accordingly, the
Chargesheet No. 203/2019 dated 22.09.2019 against the 32 accused persons was laid.
Consequently, all the accused persons were produced before the Trial Court, wherein the
charges 302/341/342/427/506/353/143/144/147/148/149/109 of IPC r/w Section 4 of the
AMSP & MSI Act were framed against all the accused persons which was read and explained
to them to which they all pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.
6. In order to bring home the charges against the accused persons, the prosecution listed
as many as 56 Prosecution Witnesses including the Medical Officer and the IO and also
exhibited as many as 89 documents and 126 materials exhibit. After closing the prosecution
evidence, the accused persons were examined under Section 313 CrPC in which, they
Page No.# 11/114
pleaded innocence. The stand of the accused persons was that of total denial. However, no
evidence was adduced in defence. The prosecution side had re-examined PW Nos. 33 & 37
after closing of the prosecution evidence to which, the defence declined further cross-
examination.
7. The learned Trial Court, after considering the evidence adduced by the prosecution
witnesses, passed the Judgment & Order dated 12.10.2020 and convicted the Sri Sanjoy
Rajowar appellant in Crl. Appeal No. 61/2021 under Section 302 IPC and imposed death
sentence upon the appellant and a fine of Rs. 500/-.
8. The learned Trial Court also convicted and sentenced the 24 nos. of appellants in Crl.
Appeal No. 61/2021 in the following manner:
Appellants No. 1 to 10 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1000/-
each in default simple imprisonment for one month under section 302 r/w section 149 of the
Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for two years under section 353 r/w section 149 of
the Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for one year under section 342 r/w section 149
of the Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for two years under section 147 of the
Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for three years and also to pay fine of
Rs.1000/- in default simple imprisonment for one month under section 4 of the Assam
Medical Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and
damage to property) Act, 2011.
Appellants No.11 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 1000/- in
default simple imprisonment for one month under section 302 r/w section 149 of the Indian
Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for two years under section 353 r/w section 149 of the
Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 342 r/w section 149 of
the Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for three years under section 148 of the Indian
Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for three years and also to pay fine of Rs.1000/- in
default simple imprisonment for one month under section 4 of the Assam Medical Service
Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence and damage to property)
Act,2011.
Page No.# 12/114
Appellants No. 12 to 24 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.
1000/- each in default simple imprisonment for one month under section 302 r/w section 149
of the Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for two years under section 353 r/w section
149 of the Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 342 r/w
Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, rigorous imprisonment for two years under section 147
of the Indian Penal Code.
Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence order passed the learned Sessions Judge,
Jorhat, Assam, the instant criminal appeals have been filed.
The prosecution evidence adduced before the learned Trial Court is highlighted
hereinunder:
9. PW-1/Soumen Kundu deposed to the effect that on August 31.08.2019, around 4
p.m., he went to Teok Tea Estate Factory. While entering the tea factory, he received
information from the gate chowkidar that some chaos was going on in the tea garden
hospital. Thereafter, he went inside the tea factory when one of the office staffs, Sri Ajay @
Bapi, informed him that the doctor had been assaulted. Before reaching the hospital, he saw
a huge crowd covering the road in front of the hospital. He found police and BSF personnel
present, and the mob chanting slogans in Assamese language that “this doctor should die
and we will not let him go”. Entering the Doctor’s chamber, he found a police personnel
pressing on the Doctor’s right thigh with a towel and there was blood all over the floor. Dr.
Deben Dutta was brutally assaulted and was in a subconscious state, with his right eye
blacked out while his hands were hanging on both sides. The Doctor recognized him and said
that his femoral artery had been cut. He then asked his office staff Shri Debojyoti Barua to
call the 108 ambulance, however the mob obstructed the ambulance, and soon after the
CRPF arrived, and the mob was moved back down and Dr. Dutta was taken to Jorhat Medical
College & Hospital in a police vehicle. He later learned that Dr. Deben Dutta succumbed to his
injuries.
When he returned from Thana, he saw the accused Sri Manoj Majhi outside the
chamber, addressing 8/10 people, few of them recording the events, and he was addressing
Page No.# 13/114
that the doctor should have been removed long before by the management and that they
have given application to the Manager to remove him. But to his knowledge, they have not
received any such application.
In the mob, he identified accused persons, including Sri Kalanag Majhi, Sri Ratul
Rajowar @ Hasim, Sri Kartik Bhumij, and Sri Sanju Majhi, who had obstructed the ambulance
from taking the doctor to the hospital for medical treatment. Other accused persons were
identified by the other staff and Estate management from video footage as well as from the
staff present during the assault.
A seizure list was prepared in presence of him and Sri Kalyanjit Bora’s. Exhibit-1 is the
seizure-list and Exhibit-1 [1], Exhibit-1 [2], Exhibit-1 [3], Exhibit-1 [4] and Exhibit-1 [5] are
his signatures. Vide Exhibit-1 [seizure-list], 30 [thirty] numbers of articles were seized by the
investigating officer which he had identified.
In his cross-examination he had stated that although he identified the four accused
persons, other than Sri Manoj Majhi, he did not know their names, during the police
investigation, he did not have the opportunity to identify those accused persons. He admitted
that he did not state before the police that accused Sri Manoj Majhi was outside the chamber,
addressing 8/10 people. He also did not state that Sri Manoj Gogoi and Sri Mukta Jyoti Barua
were confined inside the doctor’s chamber, but rather that they were inside the chamber. He
did not mention that they were restrained from using mobile phones. Additionally, he did not
state that the mob was chanting in Assamese language after he returned from the Thana. He
did not state before the police about the police personnel pressing a towel on Dr. Deben
Dutta’s right thigh or the doctor’s statement about his femoral artery being cut. He confirmed
stating the name Sri Debojyoti Barua for calling the ambulance but had mentioned calling
office staff. He also did not mention the names of Sri Kalanag Majhi, Sri Ratul Rajowar @
Hasim, Sri Kartik Bhumij, and Sri Sanju Majhi before the police, whom he had seen that day
in the court present in the mob. That he had not stated that these four accused persons
present in the mob shutting the door of the ambulance, but that they had banged the door.
10. PW-2/Kailyanjeet Borah had deposed to the effect that on 31.08.2019, around 4
Page No.# 14/114
p.m., when he was at his office chamber located at the Factory Campus, Teok Tea Estate.
Upon reaching the hospital, he saw a gathering of about 150-200 people shouting and
rioting. He noticed Sri Jibon Kurmi, Welfare Officer of Teok T.E., visibly shaken and bleeding
from right elbow. Deciding not to enter, he attempted to inform the police. Someone informed
him that the police had already been notified.
.
11. PW-3/Manoj Gogoi had deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019, around 4
p.m. At that time, he was present at his official house/quarter when he received a call from
Sri Debojyoti Baruah, office staff, informing him about a problem at the garden hospital and
that Dr. Deben Dutta had been assaulted. He rushed to the garden hospital, a mob of around
40 people creating a ruckus in the hospital premises. He proceeded to the Doctor’s chamber,
where the mob started attacking Dr. Deben Dutta. He tried to protect the doctor and pleaded
with the mob to stop, but they continued their assault on the Doctor with fists and blows and
kicks. He noticed that Dr. Deben Dutta was bleeding profusely from his left thigh. It was then
that one of the security personnel with a Saline bottle pipe as a tourniquet, in the cut portion
of the thigh to tie and stop the bleeding. Finally after much effort the authorities managed to
rescue Dr. Deben Dutta and the dead body of Samra Majhi. Later on, they came to know that
the patient Samra Majhi had got injured in the toilet of his home and was brought to the
garden hospital at around 3.15 p.m. Then the hospital dresser Sri Subash Rajowar
immediately informed the nurse Smt. Ranjula Bora, who went immediately and attended the
patient. She called up the doctor, i.e., Dr. Deben Dutta, through her mobile phone, who
advised her to give the patient a ‘Dexona’ injection. Dr. Deben Dutta arrived soon after and
tried to treat the patient Samra Majhi in the Nebolizer room where he subsequently he died.
Then a crowd of about 40 people illegally entered the garden hospital and threatened the
hospital chowkidar, Sri Suresh Robidas and also threatened the nurse, Smt. Ranjula Bora and
stopped the hospital dresser, Sri Subhash Rajowar from trying to protect the doctor. Dr.
Deben Dutta was taken to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital, where he was declared dead.
He identified the accused persons namely [1] Sri Ajay Majhi @ Tutu, [2] Sri Manoj Majhi, [3]
Sri Anil Majhi, [4] Sri Dipak Rajowar, [5] Sri Debeswar Rajowar @ Deba, [6] Sri Suresh
Page No.# 15/114
Rajowar, [7] Sri Debeswar Rajowar, [8] Sri Sanjib Rajowar, [9] Sri Sanjoy Rajowar,[10] Sri
Rinku Majhi, [11] Sri Bolin Rajowar and [12] Sri Sanju Majhi. The names of other accused
persons he learnt from his office staff as well as seeing the video clippings. He lodged an
ejahar (Exhibit-2) and was present during the inquest over Dr. Deben Dutta’s dead body
(Exhibit-3). He later learned that the incident was related to the death of Samra Majhi.
In his cross examination, he had stated that he did mention the names of the
accused persons in the ejahar. He did not state before the police the names of other accused
persons which he learned from his office staff and video clippings, as the police did not ask
him. The accused persons he identified in Court, he knew them by their faces but not by their
names. From WhatsApp and video clippings taken by one person, whose name he did not
want to disclose due to security reasons, he came to know about the involvement of the
accused persons named in the ejahar. In Exhibit-2 [ejahar], he did not mention the names of
accused persons namely Sri Kalanag Majhi and Sri Manoj Majhi. He clearly saw accused
persons namely Sri Sanjay Rajowar, Sri Sanjib Rajowar, Sri Suresh Rajowar, and Sri Arun Majhi
assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta on the relevant day. When he reached the garden hospital, the
hospital staffs were not there as they were chased away by the mob. He did not state before
the police that his Assistants had named the thirty accused persons. He further denied not
stating before police that Dr Deben Dutta, other than fist blows and kicks, was also assaulted
by broken glass pieces. He also described the doctor’s chamber, stating it was approximately
15 x 15 feet in size with a table, chair, and tool. He denied that the ejahar was not genuine or
that he falsely mentioned the names of accused persons.
12. PW-4/Bhaskar Jyoti Rajbongshi had deposed to the effect that on 31.08.2019, he
was at Teok Revenue Circle as Circle Officer and Law & Order Magistrate. Around 4:35 p.m.,
he received a call from the District Special Branch, one Sh. Handique informing him about a
violent situation at Teok Tea Garden Hospital. He then went to the hospital himself, reaching
around 4:50 p.m. He saw a violent crowd of about 250-300, including women, men and
young boys and entering the hospital through the back door of the hospital. Inside, he saw a
dead body later identified as Samra Majhi and Dr. Deben Dutta, who was sitting on a chair on
Page No.# 16/114
a pool of blood, seriously injured on his right thigh and bleeding profusely. Police personnel
were trying to stop the crowd from entering the room. Despite his efforts to pacify the crowd,
they did not respond. As the Doctor needed urgent medical attention, a plan was made to
take Dr. Dutta to an ambulance, but the crowd, mostly women, prevented it. He was told by
the police personnel that they had earlier chased away an ambulance. He then, requested the
Superintendent of Police, Jorhat, to send the Quick Response Team, alongwith available
forces in the surrounding Police Station, and more police personnel arrived around 5:15 to
5:20 p.m.With the additional police force, they managed to take Dr. Dutta and the dead body
of Samra Majhi to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital. The crowd was dispersed, and a flag
march was conducted in the Labour Lines of Teok Tea Estate for area domination. Later on,
Senior police officials arrived at the spot and they started investigation.
13. PW-5/Sarangapani Saikia had deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019.
On that day, around 4 p.m., he received a call from his colleague reporter, Sri Rupak Jyoti
Borah, informing him about an incident at Teok Tea Garden Hospital. He then informed
another colleague reporter, Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound, about the incident and asked him to
accompany him.
He also notified the Officer-in-Charge of Teok Police Station about the incident.
Thereafter, he, along with Sri Rupak Jyoti Borah and Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound, went to Teok Tea
Garden Hospital. Upon reaching the hospital, he received a phone call from his wife, who was
in an advanced stage, requesting him to pick her up from college. So, after dropping off his
colleagues, he left the spot immediately.
14. PW-6/Robi Mahali had deposed that the incident occurred around three months
prior on a Saturday. On the day of the incident, he left the hospital around 2 p.m. due to his
maternal uncle’s passing. He did not have any personal knowledge about the incident.
Cross-examination was declined by the defence.
15. PW-7/Nohan Mahali had deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019. He
worked as the driver of the ambulance at Teok Tea Garden. On that day, around 4 p.m., he
Page No.# 17/114
returned to Teok Tea Garden Hospital with a patient after medical treatment at Teok Civil
Hospital. Upon reaching the hospital, he heard a commotion inside the hospital room and saw
a gathering outside. Due to concerns for the patient’s safety and potential damage to the
ambulance, he took the patient home to Hatkhola Line, Teok T.E. Then, he took the
ambulance to the tea garden factory.
16. PW-8/Dhirah Mahali deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019, a Saturday.
He worked as a Male Attendant at Teok Tea Garden Hospital.
On that day, around 3:15 p.m., he arrived at the hospital for his duty and saw a
patient, Samra Majhi, being given water by his wife. The hospital dresser, Sri Subhash
Rajowar, was attending to other patients, and Smt. Ranjula Hazarika Borah, a GNM nurse,
was on OPD duty. When Dr. Deben Dutta arrived at the hospital, he went to his chamber.
Shortly after, a commotion erupted inside Dr. Dutta’s room. He stated that accused Sri Dipak
Rajowar threatened him to leave the area, and he identified several accused persons,
numbering about 15 (fifteen), who were present by the side of near Samra Majhi, in an
angry mood, waiting for Dr. Dutta’s arrival. He could recognize and identify accused persons
namely [1] Sri Debeswar Rajowar, Son of Late Samlal Rajowar, [2] Sri Bablu Rajowar, [3] Sri
Dipak Rajowar, [4] Sri Rinku Majhi @ Batu and [5] Sri Milan Rajowar, who were present inside
the room where Samra Majhi was kept for treatment, who were in very high temper/angry
mood waiting for the arrival of Dr. Deben Dutta.
The room where he and the nurse were stationed was bolted from the outside, and
he was confined. He managed to escape around 4:45 p.m. and left the area out of fear. At
around 6 p.m., he returned to his house, and came to know about the death of Dr. Deben
Dutta from television.
During cross-examination, he stated that he did not mention certain details to the
police, including the threat by Sri Dipak Rajowar and the names of the accused persons, as
the police did not ask him, and he was under tremendous fear. He stated that he did not
mention to the police that the individuals numbering about 15 (fifteen), who were present by
the side of near Samra Majhi, were in a high-tempered and angry mood, waiting for Dr.
Page No.# 18/114
Deben Dutta’s arrival, as the police did not ask him. He also stated that did not mention that
the room where he and the GNM nurse were present was bolted from the outside and
blocked with a bench, again because the police did not ask.
17. PW-9/Khanindra Nath deposed to the effect that the incident occurred on
31.08.2025, around 4:05 p.m., he received a direction from the Officer-in-Charge, Sri
Dipankar Gogoi, to proceed to Teok Tea Estate due to an incident. Upon arrival, he saw a
huge gathering outside the Tea Garden Hospital and around 30-40 people inside Dr. Deben
Dutta’s chamber, assaulting him. He and his team intervened, and he saw Dr. Dutta bleeding
profusely from the right thigh. In order to stop the bleeding, Sri Kamal Das accompanied him
with a saline pipe and tied the wound. Outside the hospital, the persons who were present
were shouting and threatened to kill the Doctor.
To provide immediate treatment to Dr. Deben Dutta, he, along with his staff, tried to
take the injured out of the room through the backside of the hospital. However, they were
prevented from doing so as they were gherawoed by the gathering.In the meantime, Sri
Dipankar Gogoi, the Officer-in-Charge of Teok P.S., arrived with additional police force and
they managed to take Dr. Dutta and the dead body of Samra Majhi to Jorhat Medical College
& Hospital through the backside of the hospital.
During cross-examination he had stated that he did not know the names of the
accused persons he had identified, except for Sri Manoj Majhi, whom he knew as a member
of AATTSA. He had not mentioned earlier that he could recognize the accused persons if he
saw them. He also could not recognize and identify accused Sri Rinku Bakti. He knew accused
Sri Sanjoy Rajowar because the latter had tried to assault him on the day of the incident.
However, he had not mentioned this detail to the investigating officer..
He stated that he did not specifically mention to the Investigating Officer that the
gathering was giving fist blows and kicks to Dr. Deben Dutta, but he had mentioned that the
doctor was assaulted by the gathering. He denied that he had not witnessed the incident of
assault on Dr. Deben Dutta by the accused persons.
Page No.# 19/114
18. PW-10/Debasish Baruah deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019 when
he was serving as a constable at Teok P.S. On that day, around 4:10 p.m., he alongwith Sri
Ghanakanta Mili accompanied S.I. Sri Khanindra Nath to Teok Tea Estate due to an incident.
They proceeded to Teok Tea Estate in a police vehicle driven by Sri Aditya Saw. Upon arrival,
they saw a huge gathering of about 200-300 people outside the tea garden hospital. Hearing
a commotion, he and the others, except Sri Aditya Saw, entered the hospital, where Dr.
Deben Dutta was being assaulted by about 30-40 miscreants. He tried to prevent the crowd
from entering the room. He identified several accused persons, including Sri Sibcharan
Mahali, Sri Upendra Bhumiz, and others, who were assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta. Sri Sanjay
Rajowar was particularly aggressive. The police managed to chase out the assailants, but the
crowd outside was threatening to kill Dr. Deben Dutta. More police force arrived, and they
took Dr. Deben Dutta and the dead body of Samra Majhi to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital.
During cross-examination, he stated that he had not identified the accused persons
before and had not mentioned certain details to the Investigating Officer. He knew Sri Sanjoy
Rajowar from the incident due to his aggressive behavior and took lead in assaulting the
Doctor. He stated that he did not mention to the Investigating Officer that he could recognize
the accused persons if he saw them, as he was not asked. He knew accused Sri Sanjoy
Rajowar from the incident, noting that he was more aggressive and led the assault on Dr.
Deben Dutta. However, he did not mention this detail to the Investigating Officer. He also did
not state earlier that he saw the accused persons assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta. He had seen
about 30-40 people assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta and also described the room, 15 x 15 feet in
size, where the incident occurred and denied that he had not witnessed the assault.
19. PW-11/Ghanakanta Mili deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019 when
he was serving as an AB Constable at Teok P.S. On that day, around 4:10 p.m., Sri Khanindra
Nath, S.I. [P], asked him and UBC Constable Sri Debasish Boruah to accompany him to Teok
Tea Estate due to an incident. Along the way, they encountered a mobile patrolling party of
BSF personnel with Constable Sri Kamal Das, whom they took with them. Upon arrival, they
saw a huge gathering of about 250-300 people outside the Tea Garden Hospital. Hearing a
Page No.# 20/114
commotion, he and the others, except Sri Aditya Saw, entered the hospital, where Dr. Deben
Dutta was being assaulted by about 60/70 miscreants. The police tried to rescue Dr. Dutta,
but the crowd attempted to assault them physically. With additional police staff, they
managed to move the crowd out of the doctor’s room. Later, the Officer-in-Charge Sri
Dipankar Gogoi arrived with more police force, and they took Dr. Deben Dutta and a dead
body to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital. Though the 108 ambulance arrived, it was chased
away by the crowd. He later went to the Jorhat Medical College & Hospital where he learnt
that Dr. Deben Dutta was declared dead.
He identified three accused persons, including Sri Bijay Rajowar, Sri Manoj Majhi, and
Sri Rinku Majhi, who were assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta. Sri Rinku Majhi allegedly scratched his
forehead when he intervened.
During cross-examination, he stated that he had not identified the accused persons
before. He stated that he knew Sri Bijay Rajowar from before the incident but denied
mentioning certain details to the Investigating Officer, including the crowd’s attempt to
assault the police and Sri Rinku Majhi scratching his forehead when he intervened and that he
took treatment for the scratch caused by the accused Sri Rinku Majhi. He denied that he had
not witnessed the incident.
20. PW-12/Nareswar Robidas deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019 when
he was serving as Chowkidar of Teok Tea Garden Hospital.
Around 3:20 p.m., he saw a patient being carried to the hospital on a handcart
(Thela), accompanied by about 6-7 members. They inquired about the hospital staff, and he
informed them that hospital dresser Sri Subhash Rajowar was present. He then informed Sri
Subhash Rajowar about the patient, who asked them to come inside. The patient was made
to lie on a bed in the dressing room. Sri Subhash Rajowar went to inform the hospital nurse
Smt. Ranjula Hazarika Borah and returned to the hospital. About five minutes later, Smt.
Ranjula Hazarika Borah arrived at the hospital. He couldn’t say what she did with the patient
as he was outside the hospital. He couldn’t say what the nurse did with the patient as he was
outside the hospital.
Page No.# 21/114
About 10-15 minutes later, Dr. Deben Dutta arrived at the tea garden hospital. As
soon as Dr. Dutta arrived, the 6-7 persons accompanying the patient started questioning him
about his tardiness and raised a commotion. Dr. Dutta examined the patient and found him to
be already dead. The family members started raising a hue and cry, and Dr. Dutta tried to
leave the hospital. However, accused Sri Manoj Majhi, who is a member of AATTSA arrived
and took Dr. Dutta to his chair, he told him he could not go and asked to call the Garden
Manager, so the Doctor asked the dresser, Sri Subhash Rajowar to call the Garden Manager.
After Manoj Majhi left the room, a group of about 30-40 persons gathered outside the
hospital and started assaulting the Welfare Officer.
On seeing the assault taking place, he stated that he bolted the door to the room where Dr.
Dutta was sitting, but the crowd banged on the door and asked him to open it. Inside the
room, he alongwith Dr. Dutta and a few women accompanying patient were present. When
he opened the door, the crowd rushed in and tried to assault Dr. Dutta. He stated that he
tried to save Dr. Dutta but was slapped and threatened, and forced to go out of the room.
When he came out of Dr. Deben Dutta’s room, he saw accused Manoj Majhi standing
outside, waiting for the Garden Manager. The crowd grew larger, and when the Garden
Manager arrived and entered Dr. Dutta’s room, the crowd including Manoj Majhi rushed in,
and then an outcry followed.
He recognized several accused persons entering the room, including 1. Sri Sanjoy
Rajowar, 2. Sri Sanjib Rajowar, 3. Sri xxx Rajowar 4. Sri Ajay Majhi 5. Sri Debeswar Rajowar
s/o Late Samlal Rajowar 6. Sri Arjun Majhi 7.Sri Dipak Rajowar 8. Sri Hari Majhi 9. Sri Pinku
Majhu 7 10. Sri Manoj Majhi. Someone was video recording the incident on their mobile
phone.
After some time, the police arrived but initially couldn’t disperse the crowd. An
ambulance was also chased away. Later, with more police force, they dispersed the crowd,
and Dr. Deben Dutta and the dead body were taken out through the back door. Later, at
home, he learned that Dr. Deben Dutta died.
During cross-examination, he stated that dresser Subhash Rajowar returned to the
Page No.# 22/114
hospital after summoning the Garden Manager but left again from the gate. He learned about
this later from Subhash Rajowar himself.
21. PW-13/Nurtaz Ali deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019. He was
serving as S.I. of Police at Lahdoigarh O.P. under Teok P.S. Around 4:40 p.m., the Officer-in-
Charge of Teok P.S. directed him to go to Teok Tea Garden Hospital due to a violent situation.
On reaching the hospital, they saw a gathering of about 250-300 people outside, creating a
commotion. He accompanied the Officer-in-Charge to Dr. Deben Dutta’s chamber, where they
found Dr. Dutta in a sub-conscious state severely injured in the room filled with blood. He
also saw broken glass panes of windows and doors lying in the room.
Despite calling the 108 Ambulance, it was not allowed to enter. So, they brought Dr.
Deben Dutta and a dead body to their police vehicle.
As per direction, he took Dr. Deben Dutta and the dead body to Jorhat Medical
College & Hospital with three other police staff namely Sri Gautam Barua (UBC), Sri Debasish
Baruah (UBC) and Sri Mridul Bora (Homeguard) and the driver, Sonar. Dr. Deben Dutta was
declare dead dead, and an Executive Magistrate held the inquest, and the dead bodies of Dr.
Deben Dutta & and Samra Majhi were taken to the morgue for post-mortem examination. He
seized Dr. Deben Dutta’s clothes before the examination.
Exhibit-4 is the seizure-list and Exhibit-4 [1] is his signature. Exhibit-4 [2] is the
signature of Dr. Kanak Chandra Das of Jorhat Medical College & Hospital given in his
presence. Said Doctor produced the seized clothes of Dr. Deben Dutta to him before carrying
out post-mortem examination. He identified the seized articles as follows:
Dead body of Dr. Deben Dutta was handed over to him after conducting post-mortem
examination and thereafter, he handed over the same to the relatives of the deceased.
Exhibit-5 is the Cadaver Report Form. Exhibit-5 [1] is his signature.
Viscera of Dr. Deben Dutta were preserved by the Doctor of Jorhat Medical College &
Hospital for chemical examination and report.
In cross-examination nothing pertinent about the incident was asked.
Page No.# 23/114
22. PW-14/Apurba Kalita had deposed to the effect that the incident occurred on
31.08.2019. He was serving as A.S.I. of Police at Teok P.S. On that day, he went to Jagdowar
for investigation purposes. Around 4-5 p.m., the Officer-in-Charge directed him to go to Teok
Tea Garden Hospital due to a violent situation. Upon arrival, they saw a gathering of about
250-300 people outside, creating a commotion. He and the security personnel prevented the
crowd from entering the hospital room. When they went inside, he found Dr. Deben Dutta
sitting in his chair, his right thigh tied with a saline pipe to block the blood oozing out of the
wound, below his chair was a pool of blood. He also saw broken glass pieces of doors and
windows.
Later, Officer-in-Charge Sri Dipankar Gogoi arrived with security personnel. Despite
calling the 108 ambulance, it was not allowed to enter. S.I. Md. Nurtaz Ali took the injured Dr.
Deben Dutta and a dead body to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital in a police vehicle. Later,
he learned that Dr. Deben Dutta died at the hospital.
During cross-examination, he stated that he did not know the circumstances of Dr.
Deben Dutta’s injuries.
23. PW-15/Keshab Mohan had deposed to the effect that the incident occurred on
31.08.2019. He was serving as S.I. of Police at Teok P.S. On that day,he proceeded to the
hospital with 8 BSF personnel and found a gathering of about 250-300 people creating a
commotion. He and the security personnel cleared the verandah and tried to pacify the
crowd. Later, S.I. Md. Nurtaz Ali and Officer-in-Charge, Teok P.S. Sri Dipankar Gogoi arrived.
While he controlled the crowd at the front, Md. Nurtaz Ali and the Officer-in-Charge, Teok P.S.
brought out Dr. Deben Dutta and a dead body through the back door, and they were taken to
Jorhat Medical College & Hospital. Later, he learned over the phone that Dr. Deben Dutta died
at the hospital.
Cross-examination was declined by the defence.
24. PW-16/ Ashok Sonar deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019 when he
was working as the driver of a police vehicle at Lahdoigarh O.P. under Teok P.S.
Page No.# 24/114
In the afternoon, Md. Nurtaz Ali, S.I., Ladoigarh, O.P. asked him to take him to Teok
Tea Garden Hospital. He drove the police vehicle bearing registration No. AS-30/5026 (Bolero
Invader) carrying Md. Nurtaz Ali and a BSF party, to the hospital.
Later, he moved the vehicle to the backside of the hospital as directed by the police
personnel already present. A dead body was loaded into the vehicle, and then Dr. Deben
Dutta, who was severely injured, was taken aboard.
He transported Dr. Deben Dutta, the dead body, and several police personnel,
including S.I. Md. Nurtaz Ali, Gautam Baruah (UBC) and Debasish Baruah (UBC), and Mridul
Bora (Homeguard), to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital.
Cross-examination was declined by the defence.
25. PW-17/Mridul Borah deposed to the effect that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019
when he was working as a Homeguard at Teok P.S. Upon arrival, at the Teok tea garden
hospital they saw a gathering of about 200-250 people outside, creating a commotion. An
ambulance arrived but was chased away from the area.
He and the other security personnel entered the hospital room, where they found Dr.
Deben Dutta sitting on his chair with injuries and a pool of blood below. He also saw pieces of
broken glasses of doors and windows lying scattered in the room.
They took the injured Dr. Deben Dutta and a dead body from the room through the
backside of the hospital to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital for medical treatment alongwith
a dead body. He learnt that Dr. Deben Dutta died at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital. He
stated that accused Sanjay Rajowar and Bolin Rajowar prevented him from taking Dr. Deben
Dutta out of his room.
During cross-examination, he stated that he could not recognize the accused persons
in court. He heard the names of Sanjay and Bolin from others during the incident. He did not
name the accused persons earlier to the police as he was not asked.
26. PW-18/Robi Rajak had deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019. Upon
Page No.# 25/114
arrival at the Teok Tea Garden Hospital , they saw a gathering of about 200-250 people
outside, creating a commotion.Inside, they found Dr. Deben Dutta sitting on his chair with
injuries on his right thigh, and a pool of blood under his chair. After other police officials,
including the Officer-in-Charge of Teok P.S., arrived, they took the injured Dr. Deben Dutta
and a dead body from the room through the backside of the hospital to Jorhat Medical
College & Hospital for medical treatment. Later, he learned that Dr. Deben Dutta died at
Jorhat Medical College & Hospital.
Cross-examination was declined by the defence.
27. PW-19/Diganta Kalita deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019 when
he was a Constable at Teok Police Station. While he was at the police station, S.I.
Khanindra Nath called him on the phone and told that an incident occurred at Teok tea
garden hospital and asked him to go there with other police officers. At the police station,
UBC Gautam Baruah and Sentry UBC Ashinta Khanikar were there, as others were working
on NRC duty. So, he left Ashinta Khanikar at the police station. He, along with Gautam
Baruah and two other BSF personnel, went to Teok tea garden hospital. On reaching there,
they saw outside on the road, a huge gathering of about 200/250 persons trying to enter
into the tea garden hospital and creating an outcry.
He entered into the hospital through the backside and went into the room where he saw
Dr. Deben Dutta sitting on his chair with injuries on his right thigh and below the chair of
Dr. Deben Dutta, was a pool of blood. He also saw ABC Kamal Das with a saline pipe tying
the wounded portion of Dr. Deben Dutta in order to prevent oozing of blood. He also saw
pieces of glasses of doors and windows lying scattered on the floor of the room. When he
entered into the room there were about 30 to 40 persons. Though they tried to take out
Dr. Deben Dutta out of the room, they were prevented from doing so by the
mob. Subsequently, on arrival of Officer-in-charge, Teok P.S., and more police force, from
the room, through the backside of the hospital, they could manage to take out injured Dr.
Deben Dutta and one dead body of Samra Majhi into the police vehicle and from there to
Jorhat Medical College & Hospital through the backside of the hospital. Later on, he came
to know that Dr. Deben Dutta died at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital.
He could recognize and identify specifically accused persons, namely, Sri Guludev
Majhi and Sri Siba Mahali, who at the time of incident by using filthy and obscene words,
threatened him and other police personnel present there with dire consequences. They
also pushed them in order to enter into the room of Dr. Deben Dutta.
28. PW-20/Gautam Baruah had deposed to the effect that incident occurred on
Page No.# 26/114
31.08.2019. On reaching there, they saw a huge gathering of about 250/300 persons creating
noise and hue & cry and also trying to enter into the room by using force, where Dr. Deben
Dutta was present.
As they were prevented from entering through the front door by the rampaging crowd, he
and Sri Diganta Kalita could manage to enter into the hospital through the backside and went
into the room where he saw Dr. Deben Dutta sitting on his chair with blood injuries on his
right thigh and below the chair of Dr. Deben Dutta, there was a pool of blood. He also saw, at
that time, ABC Kamal Das with a saline pipe tying the wounded portion of Dr. Deben Dutta in
order to prevent oozing of blood from the wound. He also saw pieces of glasses of doors and
windows lying scattered in the room of Dr. Deben Dutta. Though they tried to take out Dr.
Deben Dutta out of the room, they were prevented from doing so by the gathering of the
crowd. Subsequently, on arrival of Officer-in-charge, Teok P.S., and more police force, from
the room, through the backside of the hospital, they managed to take out injured Dr. Deben
Dutta and one dead body of one Majhi from the room, through the backside of the hospital
into the police vehicle and from there to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital.
Later on, he came to know that Dr. Deben Dutta died at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital.
During cross examination, he denied that he did not state before the police about presence of
about 30 to 40 persons the room of Dr. Deben Dutta when he entered there and about seeing
pieces of glass of doors and windows lying scattered in the floor of the room of Dr.
Deben Dutta.
29. PW-21/Bubul Handique deposed to the effect that the incident occurred on
31.08.2019. On that day, he was working as UB Constable in DSB Branch of Teok P.S. Around
4/4.30 p.m., on receiving information that some incident had taken place at Teok tea garden
hospital, he alongwith A.S.I. Tarun Sarma of DSB Branch, went there in a motorcycle.
On reaching there, they saw a huge gathering of crowd creating noise and hue & cry. He also
saw Dr. Deben Dutta being taken in a police vehicle to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital for
medical treatment. Later on, here turned back to Teok P.S. and came to know that Dr. Deben
Dutta died at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital.
Cross-examination was declined by the defence.
30. PW-22/Atanu Goswami deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019. He was
working as Technician of 108 Ambulance. Around 4.51 p.m., from Head-office of 108
Ambulance, in Guwahati, he was informed over telephone of the incident of assault had taken
place at Teok tea garden hospital. Immediately, he along with driver of 108 Ambulance
Sri Padma Kanta Saikia, rushed to the spot from Teok P.S. and reached Teok tea garden
hospital at 4.56 p.m. They took the Ambulance near the hospital and as soon as he
opened the door, about 200 persons came near the Ambulance and threatened them to
damage the vehicle if they take out the patient from the aforesaid hospital. Some of the
persons in the crowd, closed the door of the Ambulance and asked them to take out the
Ambulance away, else situation won’t be good. Finding no way out, and seeing the mood of
Page No.# 27/114
the crowd, they brought back the Ambulance from the spot.
Cross-examination was declined by the defence.
31. PW-23/Aditya Kumar Soh deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019 when
he was working as Driver (Lance Nayak) at Teok Police Station. Around 4.10 p.m., he was at
Teok P.S. and From his vehicle, he heard a loud shout and the gathering creating hue & cry.
During cross examination, he could not recognize any of the members of the crowd
at the time of the incident.
32. PW-24/Bikash Gowala deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019.
Out of fear of his life, instead of going to his official quarter, which is situated by the
side of Teok tea garden hospital, he went towards Mariani in his motorcycle. Later on, he
learnt from my elder brother Sri Dinesh Gowala that Dr. Deben Dutta had died.
33. PW-25/Subhash Rajowar deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019 when
he was working as Dresser at Teok tea garden hospital. Around 3 p.m., he came to Teok tea
garden hospital for his duty. While he was busy dressing other patients, Sri Milan Rajowar and
Sri Dipak Rajowar by lifting one patient namely, Samra Majhi, brought inside the hospital.
They brought the patient in a handcart. Seeing blood oozing out of the nose and mouth of
Samra Majhi, he immediately rushed to the official quarter of Smt. Ranjula Hazarika Borah,
GNM nurse, of Teok tea garden hospital and at that time it was around 3.20 p.m. He informed
her about the condition of the patient, i.e., Samra Majhi, who in turn informed Dr. Deben
Dutta about the condition of the patient. Accordingly, Dr. Deben Dutta advised Smt.
Ranjula Hazarika Borah to check the blood pressure of the patient, i.e., Samra Majhi, and to
give one Dexona injection to him. Smt. Ranjula Hazarika Borah, GNM Nurse, came to the
hospital immediately and gave one Dexona injection to the patient i.e., Samra Majhi. Around
3.55 p.m., Dr. Deben Dutta arrived at the hospital and after examining the patient, advised to
give another dose of Dexona injection to the patient, i.e., Samra Majhi. Thereafter, he advised
him to nebulize the patient and accordingly he did so. Further, the doctor also advised him to
prepare for one Saline to be given to the patient. While he was nebulizing the patient, Dr.
Deben Dutta was standing by his side, and he heard hue & cry outside the garden hospital.
So, Dr. Deben Dutta advised him to call the Garden Manager. Accordingly, he went to call the
Garden, thereafter, when he returned from the office of the Garden Manager, he saw a huge
gathering and Sri Jibon Kurmi, Garden Welfare Officer of Teok Tea Estate, being assaulted by
the gathering, and from the crowd, he could see that the members of the gathering were
assaulting the hospital staff, so he went back to his house out of fear.
He did not know who were assaulting the hospital staff inside the hospital. Later on, he heard
that Dr. Deben Dutta was also assaulted due to which he succumbed to his injuries.
During cross examination he had stated that as he was inside doing his duty so he
Page No.# 28/114
cannot say about the presence of these accused persons at the relevant time.
34. PW-26/Ranjula Hazarika Borah deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019
when he was working as Staff Nurse at Teok tea garden hospital. Around 3 p.m., while he
was preparing himself to go to his work place, i.e., Teok tea garden hospital, Sri Subash
Rajowar, Dresser of their tea garden hospital, came to his official quarter and informed him
that one serious patient has been brought to the hospital. Immediately, he rushed to the
garden hospital and checked his pulse, blood pressure and heart beat. As he failed to detect
pulse, blood pressure and heart beat of the patient, he rang up Dr. Deben Dutta and informed
about the patient and advised him to give him one Dexona injection. Accordingly, he gave
one Dexona injection to the patient, whose name was Samra Majhi. After giving the injection,
he again informed Dr. Deben Dutta about the health condition of the patient.
Then Dr. Deben Dutta came to the garden hospital immediately and again advised him to give
another dose of Dexona injection to the patient, i.e., Samra Majhi. Accordingly, he gave one
more Dexona injection to the patient. Thereafter, Dr. Deben Dutta himself was nebulising the
patient. While they were treating the patient, there were about 8/9 attendants present inside
the garden hospital and they were shouting and abusing Dr. Deben Dutta. By this time,
Dr. Deben Dutta also advised him to get one Saline ready to be given to the patient. The
persons/attendants who were present inside the garden hospital by the side of the patient,
started pushing Dr. Deben Dutta hard and in doing so, they were preventing the doctor from
giving proper treatment to the patient.
Thereafter, when he came out to attend some other patient at O.P.D. of their hospital, he saw
a huge gathering outside the hospital creating hue & cry and raising loud shout. While he was
at O.P.D., he saw a huge crowd entering into the chamber of Dr.Deben Dutta and also, he
heard breaking of glass panes of doors and windows as well as hue & cry of the crowd.
Though he made attempt to go to the chamber of Dr. Deben Dutta, he was prevented to go
there. Out of fear of my life, he left the hospital and came back to his official quarter.
Later on, he heard that Dr. Deben Dutta had died at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital
due to assault inflicted upon him.
35. PW-27/Tarun Sarmah deposed that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019 when he
was working as A.S.I. of police, DSB Branch, Teok P.S.
He was performing his official duty at Teok P.S. when around 4/4.30 p.m., he received
information that some incident had taken place at Teok tea garden hospital, so he along with
Constable Bubul Handique of DSB Branch, Teok P.S., went there in a motorcycle. Then
around 5.20/5.25 p.m., he saw Dr. Deben Dutta being taken out from inside the garden
hospital chamber and he was taken to hospital in police vehicle. Later on, on the same day,
around 8 p.m., he came to know that Dr. Deben Dutta died at Jorhat Medical College &
Hospital.
Page No.# 29/114
36. PW-28/Mukta Jyoti Baruah deposed to the effect that the incident occurred on
31.08.2019. On that day, due to some personal work, he went to Jorhat and returned to Tea
Estate around 3.30/3.45 p.m. When he was in his official Bunglow, around 4.08 p.m., he
received a call from their Estate Manager Sri Manoj Gogoi and asked him to go to Teok Tea
Garden Hospital immediately. Accordingly, he rushed to the Garden Hospital and reached the
hospital around 4.20 p.m. Upon reaching there, he saw 50 to 60 people outside the Garden
Hospital shouting. Then he went inside the chamber of Dr. Deben Dutta. He saw 30 to 40
persons present inside the room, surrounding Dr. Deben Dutta and Sri Manoj Gogoi, the
Manager of the tea estate and those persons creating noise and hue & cry. Sri Manoj Gogoi
was trying to pacify the persons present inside the Doctor’s chamber, but no one was
listening to him. After 3/4 minutes, more people entered into the Doctor’s chamber through
both front and back doors of the chamber. Seeing the rush of more people inside the Doctor’s
chamber, so, he along with one staff named Prakash Rajowar, blocked the back door of the
chamber in order to prevent further entry of other people inside the chamber. Suddenly, more
people came inside the Doctor’s chamber and they, along with the 30/40 persons who were
already present inside the chamber, started assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta by pushing away Sri
Manoj Gogoi. In the meantime, someone called police and after 15 to 20 minutes, 4 to 5
police personnel came to Teok Tea Garden Hospital. When police entered into the Doctor’s
chamber, the mob present inside the Doctor’s chamber became more violent. They pushed 2
to 3 police personnel and they also stopped the police personnel from doing their duty. After
few minutes more police force came in and Circle Officer also arrived. With presence of more
police personnel, they could vacate the Doctor’s chamber by moving out the crowd.
By that time, the condition of Dr. Deben Dutta was very bad as he was punched in his face.
He also noticed blood on the floor just below his chair where he was sitting. One police officer
folded his trouser which he was wearing and then he could see one cut mark on right thigh of
Dr. Deben Dutta, wherefrom blood was oozing out. In order to stop bleeding from the cut
portion of Dr. Deben Dutta, one police staff with the help of a saline pipe, tied the cut portion.
Then Sri Manoj Gogoi went outside and requested the crowd to allow them to take Dr. Deben
Dutta for medical attention, but no one listened to him, rather they were shouting that Dr.
Deben Dutta has to die there. After few minutes, more police force came to Teok Tea Garden
Hospital and with the help of Circle Officer; they could finally mange to take out Dr. Deben
Dutta through the back door of the chamber and then he was taken in a police vehicle. Dr.
Deben Dutta, along with dead body of Samra Majhi was taken in the police vehicle.
Before taking Dr. Deben Dutta in the police vehicle, one 108 Ambulance arrived at the Garden
Hospital but the crowd/mob did not allow the Ambulance to come inside. With the help of few
staffs, namely Sri Prakash Rajowar, Sri Jibon Kurmi, Welfare Officer, and dresser Sri Subhas
Rajowar as well as other staff, he gathered the names of the persons present in the
mob. Later on, he learnt from Sri Manoj Gogoi, Manager that Dr. Deben Dutta had expired.
Then around 9:00 to 9.15 p.m., Sri Manoj Gogoi came back to his office at Teok Tea Garden
from Jorhat. By that time, he has already drafted one F.I.R. as per the instruction of Sri Manoj
Gogoi, Manager, and after rectifying the same by Sri Manoj Gogoi, he put his signature
thereupon as informant. Thereafter, he went to Teok Police Station and submitted the F.I.R.
there, signed by Sri Manoj Gogoi. Exhibit-2 is the said F.I.R. which he has seen in the Court
Page No.# 30/114
that day.
In the F.I.R. drafted by him, he has named 30 persons. Accused persons [32 numbers],
who were present in the Court, were all present at the time of the incident. Out of them, he
could recognize and identify the accused persons namely, Sri Sanjoy Rajowar, Son of Late
Babu Rajowar, Sri Ajay Majhi, Sri Dipak Rajowar, Sri Suresh Rajowar, Sri DebeswarRajowar,
Son of Late Jogeswar Rajowar, and he saw them assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta. Other than
these accused persons, Sri Misilal Majhi @ Jabra and Sri Sanju Majhi were also present inside
the Doctor’s chamber, and he saw them shouting and raising hue & cry, but he did not see
them assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta. Rest of the accused persons were also present inside the
Doctor’s chamber engaging in pushing and shoving and raising hue & cry. On enquiry from
his official staff and few workers as well as from Sri Soumen Kundu, he came to know that
the whole incident had taken place due to instigation by accused Sri Manoj Majhi who was
AATTSA member. He also came to know that it was accused Manoj Majhi, who compelled Dr.
Deben Dutta to be seated at his chamber, preventing him from coming out.
During cross examination, he had stated that he did not state before the police that
he had drafted the F.I.R. as per the instruction of Sri Manoj Gogoi, Manager, and after
rectifying the same by Sri Manoj Gogoi, he put his signature thereupon as informant and then
he went to Teok Police Station to submit the F.I.R. there. He further stated that he has been
working at Teok Tea Estate for last 6 [six] months. He did not name the accused persons,
namely Sri Sanjoy Rajowar, Son of Late Babu Rajowar, Sri Ajay Majhi, Sri Dipak Rajowar, Sri
Suresh Rajowar, Sri DebeswarRajowar, Son of Late JogeswarRajowar, about assaulting Dr.
Deben Dutta by them specifically, but he has stated about assaulting of Dr. Deben Dutta by
the persons present inside the Doctor’s chamber. He also did not name Sri Sanju Majhi and
Sri Misilal @ Jabra, before the police, about their shouting and raising hue & cry
specifically. He also denied stating before the police about other accused persons raising
shouts and hue & cry and indulged in pushing and shoving inside the Doctor’s chamber at the
time of the incident.
37. PW-29/Rajib Gogoi deposed to the effect that on 31.08.2019, he was working as
Circle Officer, Jorhat [West]. While he was at his office, A.D.C., Jorhat, Sri Subhan Gowala,
called him to D.C. Office, Jorhat, and when he reached there, he was directed to carry out
one inquest at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital.
Accordingly, he went to Jorhat Medical College& Hospital, and held inquest over the dead
body of Dr. Deben Dutta in presence of witnesses on 31.08.2019, at 8.36 p.m.. Upon inquest
over the dead body of Dr. Deben Dutta, he found one cut injury over the head, light injury on
right eye and the stomach was swelling. He also found one cut injury over the right thigh of
Dr. Deben Dutta. As per police report/opinion, the death of Dr. Deben Dutta was due to public
Page No.# 31/114
assault.
Accordingly, he submitted his Inquest Report vide Exhibit-3 and Exhibit-3 [2] is his signature.
Cross-examination was declined by the defence.
38. PW-30/Debo Jyoti Baruah had deposed to the effect that on 31.08.2019, incident
took place. Around 4 p.m., while he was at his office alongwith other staff, he was informed
that an incident involving Dr. Deben Dutta had taken place at the Tea Garden Hospital. He
went to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital, and in his presence, the Executive Magistrate,
Jorhat, held inquest over the dead body of Dr. Deben Dutta. Exhibit-3 is the Inquest Report
wherein Exhibit-3 [3] is his signature as witness.
Cross-examination was declined by the defence.
39. PW-31/Padma Kanta Saikia deposed to the effect that on 31.08.2019, while he
was working as the driver of a 108 Ambulance, he was informed from their office in Guwahati
at 4:52 p.m. Sri Atanu Goswami, who works as a technician in his Ambulance, was told that
an injury incident had occurred at Teok Tea Garden Hospital.
By the time they arrived, there was a large gathering of about 250 to 300 people. The mob
did not allow them to take any patient in their 108 Ambulance. The mob closed the doors of
the Ambulance and threatened them to leave. The mob also told them that they would not
allow them to take Dr. Deben Dutta for treatment and they were chased out.
Cross-examination was declined by the defence.
40. PW-32/Manoj Das had deposed to the effect that he left his house to go for tea at a
tea-stall in Teok Bagan Tini-Ali. On the way, he noticed a large crowd in front of the Teok Tea
Garden Hospital. He went to the hospital and saw some people in the crowd pushing and
pulling the Welfare Officer. Among these people, he identified Sri Suresh Rajowar pushing and
pulling the Welfare Officer whom he saw in the Court that day. He had tried to stop the
people who were pushing and pulling the Welfare Officer.
At that time, hearing shouting from inside the Doctor’s room, he went there and saw Dr.
Deben Dutta surrounded by about 60 to 70 people. These people were shouting and saying
that the Doctor should be thrashed. Among the people in the Doctor’s room, he could identify
Sri Hari Majhi, Sri Dipak Rajowar, Sri Milan Rajowar, Sri Arjun Majhi, Sri Ramesh Bhumiz, Sri
Taklu Rajowar @ Sanjoy Rajowar, Sri Kartik Bhumiz, and Sri Deba Rajowar also known as
Debeswar Rajowar. They were shouting that the Doctor should be thrashed and assualted. He
had seen the accused persons in the Court that day. Meanwhile, some members of the group
inside the Doctor’s room started assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta by giving blows. He could identify
Sri Ajay Majhi, Sri Upendra Bhumiz, Sri Kalicharan Mahali, Sri Bijay Rajowar, Sri Kalanag
Majhi, Sri Siba Mahali, Sri Suresh Rajowar, and Sri Sanjib Rajowar and he saw hem giving
blows to Dr. Deben Dutta. The accused Sri Siba Mahali kicked the Doctor from the front. He
has seen the accused persons in the Court that day.
He had also deposed that, himself, the Deputy Manager and Sri Manoj Gogoi, the Bor
Manager, had tried to stop the people from thrashing/assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta, but they
Page No.# 32/114
were unsuccessful as they did not listen to them. After about 10 to 15 minutes, when the
police arrived, those people became more excited and started breaking the glass panes of the
doors and windows of the Tea Garden Hospital by giving blows and kicks. Among them, he
saw and identified Sri Sanjoy Rajowar, son of the late Babu Rajowar, Sri Ratul Rajowar, and
Sri Rinku Majhi breaking the glass panes of the doors and windows by giving blows, and in
the process, all of them sustained cut injuries on their hands. Furthermore, he saw and
identified Sri Bablu Rajowar, Sri Sivcharan Mahali, and Sri Rahul Rajowar were pulling and
pushing the police personnel. He recognized all these named accused individuals in Court. He
saw Dr. Deben Dutta bleeding profusely from his thigh and also saw injuries on his face.
When more police officers arrived, the situation was brought under control. The police took
the injured Dr. Deben Dutta and the dead body of Samra Majhi in a vehicle to the hospital.
He had also deposed that inside the Doctor’s room during the incident, he also saw
accused persons namely, Sri Sanju Majhi, Sri Bolin Rajowar, Sri Gulu Dev Majhi, Sri Arun
Majhi, Sri Pritam Majhi @ Saikia, Sri Anil Majhi, Sri Rinku Bakti, and Sri Misilal Majhi @ Jabra.
He saw these individuals standing inside the Doctor’s room. Among them, Sri Arun Majhi, Sri
Pritam Majhi @ Saikia, and Sri Anil Majhi accompanied Samra Majhi. He has seen these
accused individuals in Court. He learned over the telephone that Dr. Deben Dutta had died at
the hospital.
He had deposed that the police had recorded his statement and also his statement was
recorded before the learned Court at Jorhat, where he put his thumb impression.
On cross examination, he had stated that he has not disclosed his real name and
addresses because he was protected under the Witness Protection Scheme. He knew the
accused persons prior to the incident. He stated that in his statement before the police as
well as before the Court he did not mention the presence of 60 to 70 people in the Doctor’s
room. He stated that the persons and staff whom he had named before the Court that day at
the time of the incident, he noticed them only as he was witnessing the incident where a
large number of persons were present. He stated that he could identify the accused persons
whom he named in the Court that day at the time of the incident. He denied all the other
suggestions made to him in the cross examination.
41. PW-33/Kanak Chandra Das had deposed to the effect that he was working as a
Professor and Head of the Department of Forensic Medicine, JMCH, and Police Surgeon,
Jorhat, at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital. On that day, around 9:30 p.m., he, along with
Dr. Ved Prakash Gupta and Dr. Swaraj Phukan, both Demonstrators in the Department of
Forensic Medicine at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital, performed the post-mortem
examination on the dead body of Dr. Deben Dutta in reference to Teok P.S. G. D. Entry No.
Page No.# 33/114
526 dated August 31, 2019. The dead body was identified by UBC/28 Sri Debasish Baruah.
During the post-mortem examination, the following findings were noted: Male dead body of
average built, pale wearing a half shirt, white ganjee and a half pant, his garments were
stained with blood & dust. Dead body was cold externally and internally at the time of
examination. Both eyes & mouth were closed. Rigor-mortis was fully developed all over the
body. Penis, anus and scrotum were healthy.
Injury:-
a. Stab injury of size 4 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep was present over the medial aspect of right
thigh, situated 13 cm above the upper border of patella, 23 cm below the syphilis pubis and 5
cm medial to mid-thigh line, having clean cut margins and clotted blood were found adherent
at the wound margins which were resistant to washing with water. On dissection, it was
found that the weapon passes through (track of the injury) through the skin, sub-coetaneous
tissue, vastus medialis, adductor longus and femoral artery partially cut and separated.
b. Contusion of size 5 cm x 4 cm x soft tissue deep was present over the right side of face,
just lateral to right eye (red in colour).
c. Contusion of size 5 cm x 3 cm x soft tissue deep was present over the left side of face, just
lateral to left eye (red in colour).
d. Contusion on the scalp, size 3 cm x 2 cm over the forehead. Contusion of size 4 cm x 3 cm
over the right parietal region. Contusion of size 3 cm x 2 cm over frontal-parietal
region. Contusion of size 3 cm x 2 cm over the parietal-occipital region. (All contusions
present on the scalp were red in color).
e. Contusion of size 6 cm x 5 cm was present on front of the chest, upper part, left side.
Underneath 3rd & 4th ribs were found fractured with surrounding soft tissue contusion. Other
organs were found healthy &pale.
Marks of Ligature Mark on Neck- No ligature mark detected at the time of examination. Neck
organs were found healthy.
Scalp, Skull & Vertebrae
Scalp- as described. Vertebrae-healthy. Skull bone healthy.
Membrane- Membranes were found healthy & pale. Brain – healthy & pale.
Spinal cord -Not examined.
Heart-Healthy, pale, chambers were empty.
Pluera, Larynx & Trachea, Right Lung, Left Lung and Pericardium – healthy & pale.
Abdonimal Organs -Wall – healthy. Peritoneum – healthy & pale.
Mouth, Pharynx & Oesophagus – healthy & pale.
Stomach & Its Contents – Stomach was found healthy and pale.
Contains digested food particles.
Large Intestine & Its Contents – Healthy, pale. Contains gases & faeces.
Liver, Spleen, Kidneys & Bladders – were found healthy & pale.
Organs Of Generation, External & Internal – all were found healthy.
During the time of post-mortem examination, following the visceras preserved were
Page No.# 34/114handed over to escorting constable in a sealed, labelled and signed container with the
request to be sent to State Forensic Science Laboratory, Kahilipara, Guwahati maked as Jar
No. 1, Jar No. 2, Jar No. 3 and
Vial No-1:- Contains 2 ml of blood in sodium fluoride preservative.
Vial No-2:- Contains 5 ml of blood in EDTA vial.
During the time of post-mortem examination, video recording was done. After the
completion of post-mortem examination, video cassette was properly packed, sealed and
labelled and handed over to escorting constable UBC/28 Sri Debasish Baruah of Teok P.S. for
necessary. Post-mortem examination was done during night time as per order from District
Magistrate, Jorhat, vide Order No. JMJ.18/2017/A, dated Jorhat 31.08.2019.
Opinion regarding cause of death – Death was due to shock & haemorrhage following
the injuries sustained as described which were ante-mortem and homicidal in nature. Injury
No. (a) was caused by sharp cutting pointed weapon and Injury No (b), (c), (d) & (e) were
caused by blunt weapon. However, viscera and blood were preserved for chemical analysis.
Approximate time since death – 6 to 12 hours.
Accordingly, post-mortem report was prepared. Exhibit-6 is the post-mortem
examination report wherein Exhibit-6 (1) & Exhibit-6 (2) are his signatures and Exhibit-6 (3) is
the signature of Dr. Ved Prakash Gupta. Exhibit-6 (4), Exhibit-6 (5), Exhibit-6 (6), Exhibit-6 (7)
& Exhibit- 6 (8) are the signatures of Dr. Swaraj Phukan.
After receiving the viscera and blood analysis report from State Forensic Science
Laboratory, Kahilipara, Guwahati, we have give the final opinion as to the cause of death of
late Dr. Deben Dutta, which was referred from Teok P.S. G.D. No. 526 dated 31/08/2019,
which was later on registered as Teok P.S. CaseNo. 434/2019 under Section
302/341/342/427/506/143/144/148 of IPC read with Section 149/186 ofIPC read with Section
4 of TAMSP & SI Act, 2011.
Final Opinion – death was due to shock & haemorrhage following the injuries sustained
as described which were ante-mortem and homicidal in nature.
Injury No (a) was caused by sharp cutting pointed weapon and Injury No. (b) to [e] were
caused by blunt weapon. Approximate time since death was 6-12 hours.
Viscera analysis:- Report No. DFS 483/4620/TOX-742/2019 dated 16/09/2019 which states no
poison was detected in the Exhibit Nos. Tox 742/2019 (a) Tox 742/2019 (b) Tox 742/2019
(c).
Exhibit-7 is the Final Opinion Report. Exhibit-7 (1) is his signature and Exhibit-7 (2) is the
signature of Dr. Swaraj Phukan.
After completion of post-mortem examination over the dead body of Dr. Deben Dutta,
clothes which he was wearing at that time, were removed & handed over to the escorting
police constable alongwith the dead body. Police seized those clothes in Exhibit-4 (seizure-
list), Exhibit-4 [2] is his signature. He identified the seized articles which are the clothes worn
by the Doctor; Material Exhibit-31 to Material Exhibit-34.
Viscera of Dr. Deben Dutta were preserved in plastic constainers & vials and handed over to
escorting police constable Sri Debasish Baruah with a request to sent it to State Forensic
Science Laboratory, Kahilipara, Guwhati, for necessary investigation. Exhibit-8 is the seizure-
list by which visceras were seized, wherein Exhibit-8 (1) & Exhibit-8 (2) are his signatures.
During cross-examination, he stated that injury No. (a) was caused by sharp cutting pointed
Page No.# 35/114
weapon and same cannot be sustained falling from a hard object.
Re-examination of PW-33 at the instance of prosecution side. He deposed that in the post
mortem report, there were 05(5) numbers of injuries on the body of Dr. Deben Dutta which
are as follows:-
Injury:-
a. Stab injury of size 4 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep was present over the medial aspect
of right thigh, situated 13 cm above the upper border of patella, 23 cm below the
symphysis pubis and 5 cm medial to mid-thigh line, having clean cut margins and
clotted blood were found adherent at the wound margins which were resistant to
washing with water. On dissection, it was found that the weapon passes through (track
of the injury) through the skin, sub-cutaneous tissue, vastus medialis, adductor longus
and femoral artery partially cut and separated.
b. Contusion of size 5 cm x 4 cm x soft tissue deep was present over the right side of
face, just lateral to right eye (red in colour).
c. Contusion of size 5 cm x 3 cm x soft tissue deep was present over the left side of
face, just lateral to left eye (red in colour).
d. Contusion on the scalp, size 3 cm x 2 cm over the forehead. Contusion of size 4 cm
x 3 cm over the right parietal region. Contusion of size 3 cm x 2 cm over fronto-
parietal region. Contusion of size 3 cm x 2 cm over the parieto-occipital region.
(All contusions present on the scalp were red in colour).
e. Contusion of size 6 cm x 5 cm was present on front of the chest, upper part, left
side. Underneath 3rd & 4th ribs were found fractured with surrounding soft tissue
contusion.
Injury No. (a) is responsible for massive haemorrhage and may be solely responsible
for causing death of a person in natural course of time. Injury No. (a) may be caused
by Material Exhibit-21.
Injury No. (b) & Injury No. (c) can be caused by Material Exhibit-4.
Injury No. (d) were caused by blunt force impact and may be caused by Material
Exhibit-4.
Injury No. (e) was caused by blunt weapon.
There was no record of haemorrhage from Injury No. (e) in the post- mortem report.
This type of injury can be caused by administering leg blow.
Injury No. (a) may be solely responsible for cause of death of Dr. Deben Dutta and the
other injuries also have cumulative effect of death of Dr. Deben Dutta.
Cross -examination was declined.
42. PW-34/Adish Balmiki had deposed to the effect that on 31.08.2019, he was at
Jorhat Medical College & Hospital working as Helper. On that day, post-mortem examination
over the dead body of Dr. Deben Dutta was conducted by team of Doctors and on that day he
was present as a helper. The wearing apparels of the dead body were handed over to police
by Dr. Kanak Chandra Das and same were seized by the police vide seizure-list (Exhibit-4)
wherein Exhibit-4 [3] & Exhibit-4 (4) are his signatures.
The following seized articles were identified by him as exhibited at Material Exhibit-31 to
Material Exhibit-34.
Page No.# 36/114
Cross-examination was declined by the learned defence counsel.
43. PW-35/Ruplal Balmiki had deposed to the effect that on 31.08.2019, he was at
Jorhat Medical College & Hospital working as Sweeper. On that day, post-mortem examination
over the dead body of Dr. Deben Dutta was conducted by team of doctors and on that day he
was present as a sweeper. The wearing apparels of the dead body were handed over to
police by Dr. Kanak Chandra Das and same were seized by the police vide seizure-list (Exhibit-
4) wherein Exhibit-4 [5] & Exhibit-4 (6) are his signatures. He had identified the seized
articles as: Material Exhibit-31 to Material Exhibit-34.
Cross-examination was declined by the learned defence counsel.
44. PW-36/Gopal Bora had deposed to the effect that the incident occurred on
31.08.2019, which was Saturday when he went to the Teok Tea Garden Hospital due to a
cough where he saw a large crowd outside however he entered the Doctor’s chamber and
inside a group of about 40 to 50 people were assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta. The Deputy
Manager and Bor Manager asked him to calm the group. He also found police personnel
there. Despite his attempts and the attempts of the managers, and the police to pacify the
crowd, they would not lilsten to anyone and they continued assaulting the Doctor.
He had deposed that he saw accused Sri Ajay Majhi throwing the table of the Doctor
towards the Doctor and thereafter started giving fists and blows. Sri Ajay Majhi with the
pressure machine hit Dr. Deben Dutta on his head/face. He saw accused Sri Sanjoy Rajowar,
S/o Late Babu Rajowar, breaking the glass panes of windows, and then with a broken piece of
window glass pierce into the right thigh of Dr. Deben Dutta, accused Sh Sanjoy Rajowar also
by pushing aside the table further he push away police personnel. He saw Sri Rinku Majhi
breaking the glass panes of the windows and showing his body thereafter as a matter of
pride. He saw accused Sri Sanjib Rajowar giving fists blows to Doctor from the front as well
as backside. The accused also asked the Doctor by signaling at the injured portion of his leg
by saying whether he got a lesson or not. He also pressed the injured portion on the leg of
the Doctor by using a piece of cloth.
He had also deposed that he saw accused Sri Bijay Rajowar giving fists blows to the Doctor
on his face where from it started bleeding. Then the family members of Sri Bijay Rajowar
pulled him away from the Doctor’s chamber. He saw accused Sri Batu Mahili breaking glass
panes of doors and shouting at police and pushed them by using force. He saw accused Sri
Kalanag Majhi giving fists blows to Doctor on his face and thereafter, when the police tried to
prevent him, he pushed away the police personnel. He saw accused Sri Rahul Rajowar giving
fists blows to the Doctor on his face and thereafter broke the glass panes of windows and
doors. He also pushed the police personnel. He saw accused Sri Kartik Bhumiz shouting loudly
and instigating others to assault and thrashed the Doctor.
He had deposed that he saw accused Sri Kalicharan Mahali attempted to assault the Doctor
and when he was prevented by the police, he pushed them away by using force. He saw
accused Sri Bijit Mahali @ Siba give 2/3 kicks on the chest of the Doctor as a result of which,
the Doctor lost his balance in the chair where he was sitting. Thereafter Bijit was pushed out
by police and then he broke the glass panes of the doors and windows of the Tea Garden
Hospital. He saw accused Sri Bablu Rajowar shouting loudly and chased away the 108
Page No.# 37/114
Ambulance which had already arrived there in order to prevent the Doctor from being taken
to the hospital for treatment. He saw blood on the floor of the Doctor’s chamber. Seeing the
incident of the assault upon the Doctor, he felt bad and left the place. Later on, he came to
know that the Doctor had succumbed to his injuries on the same day. The police during
course of investigation recorded his statement. He was also produced before the learned
Magistrate to record his statements wherein he put his thumb impression.
In his cross-examination, he had stated that on the next day of the incident, he was called to
Teok Police Station and the day after he was taken to Jorhat Sadar Police Station.
He had stated that he does not remember after how many days he was brought to the
learned Court for recording of his statement. On being called by the police for recording his
statement in the Court, he went to Jorhat Sadar Police Station around 2 p.m. He gave his
statement before the learned Magistrate regarding whatever he had seen. On the day of the
incident when he went to the hospital, he saw 400/500 people outside the hospital and 40/50
persons in the Doctor’s chamber. He had admitted he didn’t tell the police or the Magistrate
that he saw 40/50 people inside the Doctor’s room. He stated that most people at the scene
were from the Teok Tea Garden, where he had lived for about ten years, but he didn’t know
all the workers by name. He stated that when he went for the first time to the Doctor’s
chamber, initially there were four police personnel and at a later stage, more police personnel
came to Teok Tea Garden Hospital but he was not there later at that time.
He stated that besides himself, the Deputy Manager and Bor Manager asked about four other
individuals inside the Doctor’s room to pacify the members of the gathering which were inside
the Doctor’s chamber. Of them, accused persons namely, Sri Sanju Majhi, Sri Deba Rajowar,
Sri Debeswar Rajowar, and Sri Gulu Dev Majhi were asked by Deputy Manager and Bor
Manager to pacify the crowd. He stated that others besides the individuals he named were
also shouting. He stated that he did not know the names of all the accused persons except
the ones he names in the Court that day. He knew the accused persons identified in the Court
prior to the incident. He had stated that accused Rinku Majhi is not mentally stable.
He had stated that at the time of recording his statements, the police did not see any videos
nor showed him any videos.
He denied the other suggestions made by the learned counsel for the
accused/defendants.
45. PW-37/Rupam Saikia had deposed to the effect that the incident occurred on
07.08.20219. However, he did not remember the day on which the incident took place.
Around 3 p.m., he went to the garden to bring ration, which is given once in a week on
Saturday. After collecting his ration, he kept the same at his house and came to the hospital
to enquire about Samra Majhi. When he arrived outside the Garden Hospital, he saw
gathering of about 400/500 persons. He entered the Garden Hospital to see Samra Majhi and
he saw him given saline and oxygen. He heard attendants of Samra Majhi saying that oxygen
Page No.# 38/114
was being given to a dead man as according to them, Samra Majhi had already died. So,
oxygen was removed from Samra Majhi.
He had deposed that in the meantime, a few members of AATTSA arrived there and
Doctor Deben Dutta was made to sit in his chamber. Also, Manager of Teok Tea Garden,
arrived there and he prevented the persons present in the Doctor’s chamber from
assaulting/thrashing Dr. Deben Dutta. At that time, there were about 15/20 persons present
including the accused Sri. Ajay Majhi, who from behind gave fist blows on the face of Dr.
Deben Dutta. He saw accused persons namely, Sri Sanjib Rajowar, Sri Suresh Rajowar and Sri
Kalang Majhi giving fist blows from the front side on the face of Dr. Deben Dutta.
He had further deposed that he saw accused Sri Sanjoy Rajowar, after giving fist blows
on the face of Dr. Deben Dutta, went outside the chamber of Dr. Deben Dutta and then he
removed his shirt and tied it in his hand and thereafter, he broke the glass panes of the doors
of the hospital and then with one piece of broken glass, pierced the same in the left thigh of
Dr. Deben Dutta. He saw accused Sri Siba Mahili giving kicks on the chest of Dr. Deben Dutta
and he also broke the glass panes of doors and windows. He also saw accused Sri Kalicharan
Mahali @ Naina giving fist blows on the face of Doctor from the front side. He saw accused
Sri Batu Mahili breaking the glass panes of doors & windows of the hospital.
He has deposed that he also saw accused Sri Ratul Rajowar breaking the glass panes of
doors & windows of the hospital and in the process he sustained cut injuries in his right hand.
He saw accused Rahul Rajowar threatening the police and gestured to kick them. He saw
accused Rinku Majhi breaking the glass panes and doors & windows of the hospital and in the
process he sustained cut injuries in his hands. He saw Sri Tokolu Rajowar breaking the boards
and banners of the hospital.
He deposed that he also saw accused Sri Bablu Rajowar chasing away the 108
Ambulance which arrived at the Garden Hospital for taking Dr. Deben Dutta to the hospital for
treatment. He heard accused persons namely, Sri Dipak Rajowar, Sri Milan Rajowar and Sri
Kartik Bhumij shouting loudly and instigating the public to assault Dr. Deben Dutta.
He had deposed that he saw and identified the accused persons whom he named that
Page No.# 39/114
day in the Court. Police during course of investigation recorded his statement.
During cross-examination, he stated that his house was in Teok Tea Estate and that he
knew the tea garden workers of the tea estate.
He had stated that the persons who were present inside the Doctor’s chamber during
the incident were from the Teok Tea Garden. He stated that the police called him to the police
station about a week after the incident and did not show him any videos before recording his
statement or during recording of his statement. He stated that he did not know the names of
everyone present inside the Doctor’s room at the time.
He had stated that he recounted that on the next day of the incident around 11 p.m.,
police came to his house and first wanted to take his father for identifing the houses of the
persons whose names the police had brought along with them. Since his father couldn’t walk
due to his sickness, he volunteered to go with the police. He named the persons that day
which the police bought along with them at that time. He was called to the police station
again after 3/4 days and stayed there for about 4/5 days. Sri Pinku Majhi and Bhai were there
along with him.
After he left the police station, he was in his house and after about three days he came
to the Court for recording the statement by the learned Magistrate. He stated that he did not
state before the police about 15 to 20 people at the Doctor’s chamber at the time of the
incident, however, he stated before the police that several persons were present inside the
Doctor’s chamber. He stated that Sri Jintu Majhi, Sri Ramesh Bhumij, Sri Kulaguti Rajowar,
and Sri Bapai Rajowar were there with him but they came out when others started assaulting
Dr. Deben Dutta. He denied the other suggestions made to him by the learned counsel for the
defendant/accused persons.
Re-examination was done by the prosecution side.
He had deposed before the Court on 07.12.2019. On that day, he also deposed about
involvement of accused Sri Sanjay Rajowar in the said incident. The accused Sri Sanjay
Rajowar whose name he had implicated in his earlier deposition is the son of late Babu
Rajowar and is a resident of Maj Line, Teok Tea Estate under Teok P.S.
Page No.# 40/114
Cross examination was declined.
46. PW-38/Paban Garh had deposed to the effect that the occurrence took place on
31.08.2019, around 3/3.30 p.m. at the hospital of Teok Tea Garden. At the time of
occurrence, he was in his house. Then, he had seen many women proceeding towards Tea
Garden Hospital and he also followed them. While he reached the Tea Garden Hospital, he
saw many people gathering outside the Garden Hospital. Having reached the hospital, he saw
accused Guludeb Majhi assaulting the Welfare Officer of the tea garden. Then he saw the
Welfare Officer fleeing away from the Tea Garden Hospital.
He had deposed that thereafter, he entered into the Garden Hospital. Then he saw
some persons assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta in his chamber. He had been able to identify
accused namely, Sri Bablu Rajowar, Sri Milan Rajowar, Sri Ajay Majhi @ Tutu, Sri Ratul
Rajowar, Sri Siba Mahali @ Bijit, Sri Sanjoy Rajowar, Sri Sanjib Rajowar, Sri Kartik Bhumij, Sri
Bijay Rajowar, Sri Kalicharan Mahali @ Naina, Sri Kalang Majhi and Sri Suresh Rajowar, who
were administering fist and leg blow on the person of Dr. Deben Dutta. He had also seen
accused namely, Sri Dipak Rajowar, Sri Kishore Bhumji, Sri Misial Majhi @ Jabra Majhi, Sri
Ramesh Bhumij, Sri Sanjay Rajowar @ Toklu assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta and also instigating
others to assault him.
He had also found some accused standing nearby the place of occurrence and they are
namely Sri Arun Majhi, Sri Hari Majhi and Sri Rinku Majhi. Thereafter, police arrived at there
and accused namely, Sri Kalang Majhi, Sri Sanjoy Rajowar, son of Late Babu Rajowar and Sri
Siba Mahali @ Bijit, had not allowed police to enter into the Garden Hospital.
He had deposed that Sri Dodhi Kurmi and Garden Manager tried to rescue Dr. Deben
Dutta from the cluthches of the accused persons. He had seen Dr. Deben Dutta in a sitting
position on a chair and also seen blood oozing out from his leg. He had also seen blood in the
floor of the room and found the glasses of the windows and doors smashed. He tried to save
Dr. Deben Dutta, but the police personnel who arrived at there ousted him from the Garden
Hospital. Then he left for home. Later on, he had heard that Dr. Deben Dutta succumbed to
the injuries. Police asked him about the occurrence and also got his statement recorded in
Page No.# 41/114
the Court.
During his cross-examination, he had stated that after two days police took him from
his home at night. The police kept him at the police station for about seven days, along with
Sri Kalanag Majhi, Sri Sanjay Rajowar @ Toklu, Sri Rameswar Bhumji, Sri Bijit Mahali, and Sri
Kartik Bhumji. He stated that during those seven days, the police didn’t question them about
the incident. After seven days, his statement was recorded in Court, and he wasn’t taken
from his residence again afterward.
He had stated that he did not see any videos on a mobile phone during his time at the
police station. He said that at the time of recording his statement, Sri Jintu Majhi, Sri Ramdev
Majhi, Sri Mukul Rajowar, Sri Ramu Gowala, and Sri Dadhi Kurmi accompanied him. During
those seven days, they did not talk about the incident at the police station.
He had stated that before his arrival at the Chamber of Dr. Deben Dutta he was
already injured. He didn’t know how the Doctor sustained leg injuries but saw the accused
persons assaulting him after his arrival. He had stated that about 30 to 40 people were
present in the Doctor’s chamber, and he could identify about 15 persons.
As a temporary worker at Teok Tea Garden, he knew the residents of his line in the
garden. He stated that he saw about 100 people outside the Tea Garden Hospital but he did
not know them.
He had denied the suggestion made by the learned counsel for the accused persons.
47. PW-39/Jiban Tanti had deposed to the effect that, the occurrence took place on
31.08.2019, around 3:30 p.m. At that time he was returning home from his work place, i.e,
Teok Tea Garden factory. On his way to home, he had seen the gathering of many people in
front of Teok Tea Garden Hospital. Then, he entered into the Garden Hospital and seen some
persons assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta and also seen some persons making video with mobile
phone and then he also recorded video with his mobile.
He had deposed that he saw accused namely, Sri Ajay Majhi, Sri Bijit Mahali, Sri Bijoay
Rajowar, Sri Sanjib Rajowar assaulting the Doctor in his chamber. He also found accused
Page No.# 42/114
namely, Sri Rinku Majhi creating hullah inside the Tea Garden Hospital. He had also seen
some of the accused persons assaulting their Welfare Officer outside the Garden Hospital. He
had been able to identify accused namely, Sri Milan Rajowar, Sri Bablu Rajowar, Sri Suresh
Rajowar, Sri Anil Mahji, Sri Pritam Majhi and Sri Dipak Rajowar assaulting the Welfare Officer
outside the Garden Hospital.
He had deposed that that day, he was been able to identify some of the accused
persons who were breaking window panes and glasses of doors and windows of the Garden
Hospital and they were namely, Sri Sanjoy Rajowar, Sri Sanjay Rajowar @ Toklu, Sri Ratul
Rajowar and Sri Bablu Rajowar and he had also seen accused Sri Rahul Rajowar chasing the
police personnel. He had also found accused Sri Batu Mahali shouting to assault Dr. Deben
Dutta.
He had deposed that accused Sri Kalicharan Mahali @ Naina entered into the chamber
of Dr. Deben Dutta through the backside door and assaulted the Doctor in his chamber. Also,
accused Sri Ajay Majhi @ Tutu, Sri Sanjoy Rajowar, son of Late Babu Rajowar and Sri Bijay
Rajowar threatened them not to adduce evidence in the Court. Thereafter, he left the
hospital and at about 9 p.m. he came to know that the Doctor had expired and out of fear he
deleted the video recorded by him from his mobile phone. Police asked him about the
occurrence and also got his statement recorded in the Court.
In his cross-examination, he had admitted he did not know when police arrested Sri
Ajay Majhi, Sri Bijay Rajowar, and Sri Sanjoy Rajowar. He stated that police picked him up
from his home at night three days after the incident and detained him for about seven days.
He was kept one day at Teok P.S. and the rest at Jorhat Sadar police station, along with
seven other individuals from Teok Tea Garden whose names he didn’t know. He stated that all
seven of them gave their statements in Court together. He stated that he recorded a video of
the incident for about an hour, capturing people both outside and inside the Doctor’s room.
He estimated around 200 to 300 people to be outside the hospital, and 30 to 35 were inside.
Those inside the Doctor’s room were from their tea garden but not employees. He denied
giving evidence in Court that day based on police instruction or in favor of the Garden
Page No.# 43/114
Manager. He denied the suggestion that they testified in Court because the police instructed
them, and he also denied being instructed by the police for his current testimony. He also
denied all the other suggestions made by the learned counsel for the accused.
48. PW-40/Raju Barik had deposed to the effect that it was a Saturday when the
incident occurred. On the date of incident, around 4 p.m., while he was in his home, at that
time he heard hue & cry coming from the side of Teok tea garden hospital. Accordingly, he
went there and witnessed gathering of many people outside & inside the Teok tea garden
hospital. He also heard the people saying “Mar-Mar”. He witnessed Sri Kalicharan Mahali, Sri
Sanjib Rajowar, Sri Sanjay Rajowar @ Toklu, resident of Pipal Line and another Sri Sanjoy
Rajowar @ Siba, Resident of Major Line, entering into the doctor’s chamber by breaking open
the door. He saw Siba @ Sanjib Rajowar entering into the chamber of the doctor and
administering leg blow over Dr. Deben Dutta’s chest. At that time, Sri Rinku Majhi, Sri Dipak
Rajowar, Sri Debeswar Rajowar, were shouting to assault the doctor.
Thereafter, one Ambulance came to take away the doctor to the hospital. But, Sri
Bablu Rajowar has prevented the Ambulance.
He had also deposed that the Police recorded his statement after the incident. He was
also brought to the court where the learned Magistrate recorded his statement. He stated
that his house is about half kilometer away from Teok tea garden hospital. Later on, he came
to know that Dr. Deben Dutta had expired.
During his cross-examination, he stated that as told by the Officer-in-charge he
changed his name. He did not know the reason why his name had been changed. He left the
hospital around 5-5:30 p.m., till then the quarrel was still ongoing.
He stated that at about 12:00 AM, at night Police came to his house and took him to
the police station. At the police station the police showed him the accused persons on a
mobile phone and asked whether he was familiar with them or not and he told the police he
was familiar with them. He was released around 10 a.m. the next morning, and police asked
him nothing else. He didn’t enter the doctor’s room but waited outside. There were many
Page No.# 44/114
people inside the chamber. He denied that his court testimony differed from what he told the
police. He was at Jorhat Police Station for about ten days before giving his statement in court.
He admitted that he had stated before the police that he had not seen as to who had
assaulted the Doctor inside his chamber. He admitted that he stated before the learned
Magistrate and also before the police that the accused Sri Rinku Majhi had broken the glass of
windows. He denied all the other suggestions made by the learned counsel for the accused
persons.
49. PW-41/Pabitra Sahu as a daily wage earner. He had deposed to the effect that the
occurrence took place on 31.08.2019. On the date of incident, at about 3:30- 4:00 p.m., he
was returning home from his work place. Then he saw the assembling of many persons near
Teok tea garden hospital. Then, he also entered into the garden hospital and found, one Sri
Sunil Majhi @Arjun and enquired about the occurrence. Then, he was told that his elder
brother Samra Majhi went to the washroom and then fell down and sustained injury over his
head and then he was taken to Teok tea garden hospital and there was no staff in the
hospital and as such, the treatment got delayed, and as a result, he succumbed to his
injuries. Thereafter, he saw some of the persons who assembled there and raised hue & cry
and started beating the doctor in his chamber. Amongst the persons, who had assaulted the
doctor, he could identify accused namely, Sri Ajay Majhi, Sri Kalnag Majhi, Sri Bijay Rajowar,
Sri Sanjib Rajowar, Sri Suresh Rajowar, Sri Siba Mahali and Sri Kalicharan Mahali. He had also
witnessed accused namely, Sri Rinku Majhi, Sri Ratul Rajowar and Sri Sanjoy Rajowar, Son of
Babu Rajowar, breaking the window-panes and tried to assault the doctor by entering into his
chamber.
He had also deposed that Sri Rahul Rajowar, Sri Sanjay Rajowar @ Taklu and Sri Batu
Mahali @ Sivcharan, have prevented police in entering into the chamber of the
doctor. Accused namely, Sri Arjun Majhi and Sri Ramesh Bhumij shouted and instigated the
people present there to assault the doctor and accused Sri Bablu Rajowar has prevented the
108 Ambulance from entering into the Teok tea garden hospital and sent it back. Accused Sri
Arun Majhi, who was the friend of deceased Samra Majhi, also shouted to assault the
Page No.# 45/114
Doctor. Thereafter, the police took the Doctor, in their vehicle to the hospital and he left the
place of occurrence. Later on, he heard that Dr. Deben Dutta had expired.
He had deposed that he had requested the police to conceal his name being afraid of
deposing against the accused.
Police took him to the court where the learned Magistrate recorded his statement.
In his cross-examination, he had stated that police recorded his statement after one
day of the incident. He went to the police station on 01.09.2019, voluntarily and he told the
Officer-in-charge about the accused who were entangled/involved in the incident. He stated
that except for Sri Arjun Majhi, he did not speak to anyone else. He stated that he was not
familiar with others present, except for Sri Arjun Majhi and the accused he identified in court.
He stated that he did not enter the Doctor’s chamber but was on the verandah of the Garden
Hospital, and there were about 70/80 people in the varendah of the hospital. The incident
occurred inside the doctor’s room, which had one door and one window with glass panes
facing the verandah. He denied the suggestion that being on the verandah prevented him
from seeing what happened inside the Doctor’s room. He stated that police did not show him
any videos on a mobile phone. He stated that he not seen any staff in the Teok tea garden
hospital while the incident took place. He does not know the staff of the tea garden who were
present amongst the 70/80 people in the tea garden hospital. He denied the suggestion that
he did not see the occurrence and was turtored by the police. He also denied all the other
suggestions made by the learned counsel for the accused persons.
50. PW- 42/Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound, reporter, NE Telvision. He had deposed to the
effect that the incident occurred on 31.08.2019. On that day, around 3.30 p.m., his colleague
Sri Rupak Bora who is a newspaper reporter/journalist by profession, informed Sri Saranga
Pani Saikia who is also his friend and reporter over telephone that in the Tata Tea Garden
Hospital of Teok, some people surrounded the Doctor and the situation is tense. Then he
alongwith Sarangapani Saikia went to Teok Tea Garden Hospital and witnessed many people
in the hospital compound. He went inside the Garden Hospital but his colleague stayed
outside the hospital campus. There, he witnessed the garden Welfare Officer proceeding
Page No.# 46/114
inside the campus and then on the verandah the people present there surrounded him and
started scuffling with him. He tried to intervene but he could not pacify them. Then, he has
recorded the video of the occurrence in his mobile [Redme Note-4]. He had also deposed that
some of the people present there assaulted the Welfare Officer and thereafter, the Welfare
Officer left the Garden Hospital. Then the situation became normal. Then he went inside the
hospital and met the Dr. Deben Dutta in his chamber and he talked to him. The Doctor told
him that one patient expired and the relatives became emotional and they were weeping near
the dead body. The Doctor was alone in the hospital and he requested him to remain there
for sometime.
He had also deposed that thereafter, about 50/60 persons entered into the Doctor’s
chamber and started altercation with him. Thereafter, the persons started causing mischief of
the table of the Doctor and other articles present inside the Doctor’s chamber and started
man-handling him. In the meantime, police personnel arrived there. The public present there
started altercation with the police personnel also. Then the people who remained outside the
hospital started causing mischief with the windowpanes of the hospital. Thereafter, again the
people inside the room started hue & cry. He saw the Doctor sitting on a chair and also saw
oozing out of blood from his right leg and blood-stain over his trouser. He entered into the
Doctor’s chamber and he found no articles of first-aid which were thrown out of the hospital
by the people who remained inside the room. He then tried to wrap the injury by means of
‘Saline pipe’. In the meantime, one 108 Ambulance arrived there but the people gathered
inside the hospital did not allow to take away the injured Doctor from the hospital.
He had also deposed that thereafter, with the help of a police vehicle and through the
back door of the hospital they shifted Dr. Deben Dutta to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital
for medical treatment. About two hours after shifting the Doctor to Jorhat Medical College &
Hospital, he came to know that the Doctor had succumbed to his injuries.
He had deposed that he recorded video footage inside the Doctor’s room also while the
occurrence was going on and reported he got the news broadcasted almost in all news
channel. Thereafter, the Officer-in-charge, Teok P.S. served one notice to him to furnish the
Page No.# 47/114
video footage recorded by him alongwith his mobile phone with one certificate. Exhibit-9 is
the copy of the notice sent by police wherein Exhibit-9 (1) is his signature. Then at the police
station he handed over the mobile phone and the police extracted the data from a mobile to
a compact C.D with the help of a data cable. The data from his mobile phone were
transferred to 18 [eighteen] C.D., which he has submitted before police in the same form,
which he has recorded in his mobile phone and he put his signatures in the 18 [eighteen]
C.D. He has also given one certificate each against eighteen C.Ds./discs.
Material Exhibit-35 to Material Exhibit-52 are the Compact Disc marked as the videos
recorded by him.
In his cross-examination, he stated that the police recorded his statement. He
admitted the suggestion that he did not state before the police that his colleague Sri Rupak
Bora who was a newspaper reporter/journalist by profession, informed Sri Saranga Pani
Saikia, who is also a friend and a reporter over the phone that about a tense situation at the
Teok Tea Garden Hospital in Teok where some people had surrounded the Doctor. He also
admitted the suggestion that he did not state before the police that he along with
Sarangapani Saikia went to Teok Tea Garden Hospital and witnessed many people in the
hospital compound. He stated that he went inside the Garden Hospital but his colleague
stayed outside. He witnessed the garden Welfare Officer proceeding inside the campus, and
then on the varendah the people present there surrounded him and started scuffling with
him. He tried to intervene but could not pacify them and that then he had recorded the video
of the occurrence in his mobile (Redmi Note 4). Some of the people there assaulted the
Welfare Officer left the Garden Hospital. Then the situation became normal. Then he went
inside the hospital and met Dr. Deben Dutta in his chamber and he talked to him. The Doctor
told him that one patient expired and the relatives became emotional and they were weeping
near the dead body. The Doctor was alone in the hospital and he requested him to
remain there for sometime.
He also stated that he did not state before the police that about 50/60 persons entered
into the Doctor’s chamber and started altercation with him. Thereafter, the persons started
Page No.# 48/114
causing mischief of the table of the Doctor and other articles present inside the Doctor’s
chamber and started man-handling him. In the meantime, police personnel arrived there. The
public present there started altercation with the police personnel also. Then the people who
remained outside the hospital started causing mischief with the windowpanes of the hospital.
Thereafter, again the people inside the room started hue & cry. He saw the Doctor sitting on
a chair and also saw blood oozing out from his right leg and blood-stain over his trouser. He
entered into the Doctor’s chamber and he found no articles of first-aid which were thrown out
of the hospital by the people who remained inside the room. He then tried to wrap the injury
by means of ‘Saline pipe’. In the meantime, one 108 Ambulance arrived there but the people
gathered inside the hospital did not allow to take away the injured Doctor from the hospital.
He denied the suggestion that he did not state before the police that thereafter, with
the help of a police vehicle and through the back door of the hospital they shifted Dr. Deben
Dutta to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital for medical treatment. About two hours after
shifting the Doctor to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital, he came to know that the Doctor
had succumbed to his injuries.
He stated that he recorded video footage inside the Doctor’s room also while the
occurrence was going on. Being reported he got the news broadcasted almost in all news
channels. Thereafter, the Officer-in-charge, Teok P.S. served one notice to him to furnish the
video footage recorded by him alongwith his mobile phone with one certificate. He stated that
he had not seen the persons who caused mischieve of the window panes from outside. He
stated that after 4/5 days of the incident, he gave the video footage to the police but he had
forgotten the date on which he gave the same to the police. He charged his mobile battery
for those 4/5 days. He stated that he supplied the video footage to all his collegues who were
working in different news channel prior to supply of the same to police personnel. He stated
that before giving video footage to police some video footage got viral in social media.
He had stated that many others present also recorded videos. He recorded the video
on his phone’s internal memory. He saw video footage of Teok Tea Garden Hospital on his
facebook but didn’t receive any such videos directly on his phone. He denied the suggestion
Page No.# 49/114
that the video footage he gave to the police was not the original he recorded. He denied the
suggestion that viral video footage also got saved on his phone’s internal storage, as his
phone only had one. He denied the suggestion that the video footage recorded by him in his
mobile phone was unauthenticated, inaccurate, and irrelevant to the occurrence of this case.
He denied the suggestion that the video footage which he gave to the police officer vide the
(Material Exhibit-35 to Material Exhibit-52) were not related to the case. He stated that the
certificates issued by him regarding different video footage of the incident were drafted by
the police at the police station itself and he put his signature in the certificates after going
through the same. He stated that he received the Exhibit-9 (notice) at his residence. He
received the notice (Exhibit-9) on 14/09/2019, and he put his signatures on the certificates
which he had given regarding the video footage CDs which he signed on the same date. He
stated that police did not seize his mobile phone used to record the video.
51. PW-43/Sri Riju Kumar Saikia had deposed to the effect that the incident occurred
on 31.08.2019. Around 4 p.m., he received information from my colleague Sri Utpal Jyoti
Khound that some incident had taken place at Teok tea garden hospital with the doctor.
Arriving at the hospital, he witnessed the Dr. Deben Dutta sitting on the chair of his chamber.
The Garden Manager of the garden alongwith two garden employees of the office tried to
protect the doctor from the people present there. He do not know the name of the Garden
Manager. About 70/80 people were inside the garden hospital and about 500 people were
standing outside the garden hospital. While he was present there, he has seen one person
entering into the chamber of the Doctor under his table and administered fist blow on the
person of the Doctor. Then the other people present there started assaulting the Doctor. Then
some persons, who were standing outside the tea garden hospital compound, dashed the
windowpanes from outside which hit on the head of the Doctor and the Doctor sustained
injury and blood was also oozing out from one of his leg. He captured the video footage of
the incident with his mobile [Oppo A-5],. Then they asked the police personnel present there
to call one 108 Ambulance. When the 108 Ambulance arrived there, the people present there
did not allow to shift the Doctor in the said vehicle, for which, the 108 Ambulance had to
return back. The number of police personnel present at the place of occurrence was very few
Page No.# 50/114
in comparison to the number of people present there. And therefore, police personnel could
not control the mob. Then his friend Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound wrapped the injury of the doctor
to stop bleeding from his leg by a ‘Saline’ pipe. Thereafter, some more police personnel
arrived there and shifted the Doctor to the hospital through the back door in a police vehicle.
Later on, they came to know that the doctor succumbed to the injuries at Jorhat Medical
College & Hospital. He has sent the video footage recorded by him through his mobile to his
channel ‘Pratidin Time’ from where it was broadcasted. Then police requested him to give the
said video footage to them also. Accordingly, he has given the same to police. They have
extracted the data from his mobile to a C.D. through the date cable. They have also given a
notice to him also to that effect. Exhibit-28 is the copy of the notice sent by police wherein
Exhibit-28 (1) is his signature.
He had deposed that the data from his mobile were transferred to 2 [two] C.D. which
he has submitted before police in the same form, which he has recorded in his mobile phone
and he put my signatures in the 2 [two] C.D’s. He has also given one certificate each against
two C.Ds./discs.
Material Exhibit-53 is Compact Disc marked as Video No. 1 wherein Exhibit-53 [1] is his
signature over the C.D. Exhibit-29 is the certificate issued against Video No. 1 and Exhibit-29
(1) & Exhibit-29 (2) are his signatures.
Material Exhibit-54 is Compact Disc marked as Video No. 2 wherein Exhibit-54 [1] is his
signature over the C.D. Exhibit-30 is the certificate issued against Video No. 2 and Exhibit-30
(1) & Exhibit-30 (2) are his signatures.
In his cross-examination, he had admitted that the police recorded his statement and
that he was present in the room where the doctor was attacked by the mob on the day of the
incident.
He had admitted that he did not tell the police that upon arriving at the hospital, he
saw Dr. Deben Dutta sitting on his chamber’s chair, that the Garden Manager and two office
employees tried to protect the doctor, that he didn’t know the Garden Manager’s name, and
that about 70 to 80 people were inside and about 500 outside the hospital, because the
Page No.# 51/114
police didn’t ask him about these details. He also didn’t tell the police that he saw someone
enter the Doctor’s chamber, go under the table and punch the Doctor, after which others
assaulted the Doctor. He also didn’t mention that people outside broke the windowpanes,
hitting the Doctor’s head and causing injury, and that he saw blood oozing from the doctor’s
leg, because the police didn’t ask him about these things. He denied not telling the police that
he captured video footage of the incident with his Oppo A-5 mobile, that they asked the
police to call a 108 Ambulance, that the ambulance arrived but couldn’t take the doctor
because of the crowd, that the police presence was small compared to the crowd and they
couldn’t control it, that his friend Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound used a saline pipe to stop the
bleeding from the doctor’s leg, that more police arrived and took the doctor to the hospital
through the back door in a police vehicle, and that they later learned of the doctor’s death at
Jorhat Medical College & Hospital and denied that he wasn’t present at the scene, didn’t
witness the incident, and that his court testimony wasn’t a true account of events. He stated
he gave the video footage to the police two to three days after the incident. Before he gave
the clips to the police, some footage went viral on social media. He continued using his
mobile after recording the video, including social media. He saw some viral video footage on
his phone and had an extra memory card in it. He recorded the incident video on his phone’s
internal memory and also recorded other incidents on the same phone, stored in the internal
memory.
He stated that the police at the station drafted the certificates (Exhibit-29 & Exhibit-30)
regarding the video footage after asking him, and he signed them after reviewing their
contents. He admitted he wasn’t a mobile expert. The video name
“VID20190831163154.mp4” and Serial No. 43 ADCO were reflected on his phone. He
transferred the video footage to the police at the station using a data cable.
52. PW-44/Sri Duleswar Majhi had deposed to the effect that the incident occurred on
31.08.2019. At about 3 p.m., he was in the office of Teok Tea Estate. Around 3.30 p.m., he
received information from Sri Manoj Rajak, who is the chowkidar of the hospital, that some
incident had taken place in Teok Tea Garden Hospital. Accordingly, he went towards Teok Tea
Page No.# 52/114
Garden Hospital in his bicycle. Sri Manoj Gogoi, Manager, Teok T.E. went to Teok Tea Garden
Hospital in a vehicle and he followed him. When he reached there, he found about 40
persons on the verandah of the hospital and they were shouting. He also saw the Garden
Manager, Sri Manoj Gogoi entering into the hospital compound and he also immediately
followed him. He witnessed after entering into the compound of the hospital that around
30/40 persons were assaulting the Doctor who was sitting on his chair in his chamber. He also
witnessed the persons assaulting the Doctor with fist & blows. All of them belonged to Teok
Tea Estate.
He had witnessed (1) Sri Sanjib Rajowar, son of Jotin Rajowar, (2) Sri Sanjoy Rajowar
(3) Sri Sanjay Rajowar @ Taklu (4) Sri Bablu Rajowar (5) Sri Bijay Rajowar (6) Sri Suresh
Rajowar (7) Sri Kartick Bhumij (8) Sri Rahul Rajowar (9) Sri Kalanga Majhi (10) Sri Sibcharan
Mahili @ Naina (11) Sri Kalicharan Mahili (12) Sri Siba Mahili (13) Sri Ajay Majhi (14) Sri Ratul
Rajowar (15) Sri Rameswar Bhumij (16) Sri Rinku Majhi (17) Sri Milan Rajowar (18) Sri Dipak
Rajowar (19) Sri Rinku Bakti and, (20) Sri Bolin Rajowar, assaulting the Doctor, Deben Dutta
in his chamber with fist & blows.
He had deposed that he also witnessed the Garden Manager Sri Manoj Gogoi, Deputy
Manager Sri Mukta Jyoti Barua and staff Sri Bijoy Rajowar trying to save the Doctor from the
clutches of the accused named-above. He also tried to pacify the person present in the
Doctor’s chamber. At that time somebody had broken the window panes of the Garden
Hospital. He came out of the Doctor’s chamber and witnessed police personnel entering into
the compound of the Teok Tea Garden Hospital. Some of the persons present outside the
hospital compound were shouting to assault the Doctor. They also caused mischief of the
furnitures in the hospital. Someone from there called the 108 Ambulance and when the
Ambulance arrived at there, accused persons namely Sri Bablu Rajowar and Sri Milan
Rajowar, chased away the 108 Ambulance. They again returned to the Doctor’s room and
started to assault the Doctor. Rest of the accused persons whom he has named that day also
followed Bablu and Milan to chase away the 108 Ambulance from the hospital campus.
Thereafter, all of them again went towards the Doctor’s chamber and started assaulting the
Doctor.
Page No.# 53/114
He had deposed that when police arrived there and tried to control the situation then
some of the accused persons shouted to assault the police personnel also. He also went near
the 108 Ambulance and when he returned to the hospital, he found blood oozing out from
one of the leg of Dr. Deben Dutta. After sometime, more police personnel arrived at Teok Tea
Garden Hospital and then the situation was to some extent under control and in the
meantime, the Doctor was shifted to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital at about 5.30 p.m.
where he succumbed to his injuries at 7.30 p.m. Later on, he came to know that Samra
Majhi, who was taken to the Garden Hospital for treatment and who was suffering from
illness had expired in the Teok Tea Garden Hospital. He has seen the dead body of Samra
Majhi at the hospital. Later on, the dead body was taken to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital
for post-mortem examination.
On the next day of occurrence, police recorded his statement by calling him to the
police station. Then they showed him some video footage of the incident and then he
identified the accused persons whose names he has told before the Court that day.
He had deposed that he cannot say wherefrom the police collected the aforesaid video
footage which was shown to me by police personnel. But he has seen some of the people
recording video footage of the incident at the place of occurrence. Police having shown him
the video footage asked to identify the accused persons and accordingly, he identified them
seeing the video footage and thereafter police downloaded some of the snaps of the video
and taken print-out of the same and also taken his signature thereon.
Material Exhibit-53 is the Compact Disc marked as Video No. 1 and on playing of the
same in the Court that day in a desk-top computer he has seen assaulting the Doctor by
accused Sri Ajay Majhi and Sri Manoj Majhi was standing nearby the co-accused Sri Ajay
Majhi.
Material Exhibit-55 is the print-out photograph of Video No. 1 and Material Exhibit-55
[1] is his signature.
He had deposed that Sri Sanjay Rajowar, Sri Rinku Majhi, Sri Suresh Rajowar, Sri
Rameswar Bhumij, Sri Bablu Rajowar, Sri Kalanag Majhi, Sri Sanjib Rajowar, Sri Debeswar
Page No.# 54/114
Rajowar, Sri Kartick Bhumij, Sri Rahul Rajowar, Sir Sibcharan Mahili were scuffling with the
police personnel. Sri Siba Mahili @ Bijit Mahili and Sri Dipak Rajowar were assaulting the
Doctor and Sri Manoj Gogoi, the Garden Manager and Sri Mukhul Rajowar ware trying to save
the Doctor which he has seen in the video on playing. He also saw blood oozing out of blood
from the head of Dr. Deben Dutta. He also saw accused Sri Sanjay Rajowar, son of Late Bablu
Rajowar breaking the window glasses of window panes. Many people assembled at the place
of occurrence but he could not identify all the persons.
Material Exhibit-55 bears photograph of accused Sri Manoj Majhi and Sri Ajay Majhi
and stated that Exhibit 56 to Material Exhibit-126 are the photo printouts of all the accused
persons Material Exhibit-124 to Material Exhibit-126 are taken from Video No. 14.
During his cross-examination, he had admitted that all the accused 20 (twenty) accused
persons whom he had named in his examination in chief had not assaulted the Doctor. He
could not identify any of the accused persons in the photograph shown. However, he could
identify a few in the cross examination.
He had stated that his statement was recorded by the police, and the Investigating
Officer (I.O.) subsequently read it over to him. He confirmed that he did not tell the I.O. that
some individuals outside the hospital were shouting to assault the Doctor and also damaged
the Garden Hospital’s furniture. He also confirmed that he did not tell the I.O. that the
accused Sri Bablu Rajowar and Sri Milan Rajowar chased away the 108 Ambulance.
Furthermore, he confirmed that he did not tell the I.O. that both accused returned to the
Doctor’s chamber after chasing the Ambulance and then assaulted the Doctor. He also did not
tell the I.O. that these two accused chased the Ambulance from the 108 campus. Additionally,
he confirmed that he did not tell the I.O. that all the accused then went to the Doctor’s
chamber and assaulted him. He stated that he did not tell the I.O. that when the police
arrived and tried to control the situation, some of the accused shouted to assault the police
personnel as well. He also confirmed that he did not tell the I.O. that he went to the
Ambulance and upon returning to the Doctor’s room found blood oozing from the Doctor;
that after some time more police gathered at the hospital, the situation was controlled, he
Page No.# 55/114
returned to the office, and then learned around 5:30 p.m. that Dr. Deben Dutta had been
taken to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital for treatment where he died. He also confirmed
that he did not tell the I.O. that he later learned about the death of Samra Majhi, who had
been taken to the hospital for treatment and had died at Teok Tea Garden Hospital, and that
he had seen Samra Majhi’s body at the hospital before it was sent for post-mortem.
He stated that he couldn’t recall whether he was questioned about the incident the next
day or the day after. The photographs shown to him in Court that day were also shown to
him by the police. He was shown a silent video in Court the previous day. He didn’t hear what
was said in Video No. 1, and Video Nos. 2, 3, 4, 10, 12, 13, and 14 were not shown to him in
Court that day. He hadn’t seen the roles played by the accused in Videos No. 2, 3, 4, 10, 12,
13, and 14. He denied that the videos shown to him were not the videos produced in Court
and that Video No. 1 shown in Court was not the video shown by the police. He denied
testifying falsely and not knowing which of the twenty previously named accused assaulted
the Doctor. He was called to the police station for six to seven days, and police showed him
videos during those times. He didn’t know from whom the police had collected those videos.
He denied not seeing the occurrence and that the accused he named in his evidence were not
present at the scene, also denying that he was testifying in Court as instructed by the police.
53. PW-45/Dr. Amrit Kumar Saikia had deposed to the effect that 18.09.2019, he got
one letter from S.I. Dipankar Gogoi, In-charge of Teok Police Station requesting for
clarification regarding whether the Teok Tea Estate Hospital, under Teok P.S., District-Jorhat,
is a “Medicare Service Institution” and the deceased Medical Officer Sri Deben Dutta, a
medicare service personnel as per the Assam Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service
Institution [Prevention of Violence & Damage to Property] Act, 2011 in connection with Teok
P.S. Case No. 434/2019. Accordingly, on 18.09.2019, he has given a reply to the Officer-in-
charge, Teok P.S., to the effect that Teok T.E. Hospital, under Teok P.S., District-Jorhat, is a
“Medicare Service Institution” and the deceased Sri Deben Dutta is a medicare service person
as per the Assam Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Servide Institution [Prevention of
Violence & Damage to Property Act], 2011. Exhibit-31 is his report and Exhibit-31 [1] is his
Page No.# 56/114
signature thereon.
54. PW-46/Sri Manjil Dutta had deposed to the effect that in his deposition, he stated
that late Deben Chandra Dutta is his father. The occurrence took place on 31.08.2019. On
that day, while he was at Guwahati, he received one phone call from one of his best friend Sri
Sujit Dutta that some labourers of Teok Tea Estate have assaulted his father Dr. Deben Dutta
at the Teok Tea Estate Hospital with sharp glass plate and cut the artery of right leg and as a
result, massive bleeding is taking place from all over the body of his father. Then he asked
him to take his father to the hospital. Then his friend told him that he is not in a position to
take his father to the hospital as the tea garden labourers prevented and also they stopped
the 108 Ambulance that came to take his father to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital. His best
friend had shown him the video footage of assaulting his father by the labourers of Teok Tea
Estate Hospital. Later on, he came to know that his father was shifted to Jorhat Medical
College & Hospital for treatment. Then, he has proceeded to Jorhat from Guwahati at about
5.30 p.m. on that day itself and reached Jorhat Medical College & Hospital at about 11 p.m.,
there he found his father dead. When he reached Jorhat Medical College & Hospital, he had
witnessed the dead body of his father being taken for post-mortem examination. Thereafter,
they have taken the dead body to their residence, where he has witnessed his dead body and
performed his last rites on the next day.
He had deposed that he has seen the video footage and he has noticed the Welfare
Officer of the garden namely Sri Jibon Kurmi who had come to rescue his father and the tea
garden labourers assaulting him with fist & blows. He has also seen in the video footage that
his late father tried to save himself but the tea garden labourers assaulted him and also cut
the artery of his right leg. He knew that accused Sri Sanjay Rajowar was the main culprit in
the incident. He heard from other persons that accused Manoj Majhi had told that the Doctor
should not be in the service in the tea garden. Thereafter, he lodged the ejahar with the
Officer-in-charge, Teok P.S. on 04/09/2019, mentioning the name of accused involved in the
occurrence. Exhibit-32 is the said ejahar and Exhibit-32 [1] is his signature thereon.
In his cross-examination, he had admitted that he lodged the F.I.R. [Exhibit-32] based on the
video footage he saw and what he heard from his friends and other people. He mainly heard
about the incident from Sri Sujit Dutta and Sri Manoj Gogoi. He also heard about it from some
other people but couldn’t recall their names, so he didn’t include them in the F.I.R. He denied
that his friends Sri Sujit Dutta and Sri Manoj Gogoi gave him an incorrect account of the
incident. He confirmed that he did not mention the names of Sri Sujit Dutta and Sri Manoj
Gogoi in the F.I.R. His father was diabetic and had hypertension, and was 70 years old at the
time of the incident. He admitted that he did not see the incident with his own eyes. He
watched a video recording made by Sri Utpal Saikia. He also received other video footage on
his mobile but didn’t know who recorded it or sent it to him. He believed that if the Tea
Garden’s Welfare Officer, Sri Jibon Kurmi, had been allowed into the hospital, his father would
still be alive. He saw Manoj Majhi assaulting Sri Jibon Kurmi in a video but didn’t know who
recorded it. He denied not seeing the video of Sri Manoj Majhi assaulting Sri Jibon Kurmi. He
confirmed that he did not mention Sri Sanjoy Rajowar as the main culprit in his F.I.R. He
denied testifying falsely in Court that day. He lodged the F.I.R. four days after the incident
and mentioned the reason for the delay. The I.O. did not record his statement regarding the
Page No.# 57/114
incident. He denied testifying falsely in Court that day in favor of his late father.
55. PW-47/Sri Arup Manta had deposed to the effect that on 11.09.2019, he was
working as Junior Scientific Officer, DNA Typing Unit & Serology Division, Directorate of
Forensic Science, Assam, Kahilipara, Guwahati-781019. On that day, he received one sealed
parcel from the Director- cum-Chemical Examiner, Directorate of Forensic Science, Kahilipara,
Guwahati, Assam, in connection with Teok P.S. Case No. 434/2019 dated Nil under Sections
302/341/342/427/506/143/ 144/147/148 of IPC read with Section 149/186 of IPC and read
with Section 4 of Assam Medicare Servie Persons and Medicare Service Institutions
(Prevention of Violence & Damage to Property) Act, 2011 which was sent by the Additional
Superintendent of Police [Headquarter], Jorhat, by his Memo No. JHT/V/19/7427 dated
10/09/2019. Their Director received 2 [two] parcels. The parcel 1 (one) consisted of one (1)
exhibit in a paper packet and parcel 2 (two) consisted of one (1) exhibit in a paper packet
which was sealed with the impression seal corresponding with the seal impression forwarded.
(Four exhibits were received from Serology Division of our laboratory).
Description Of Articles
1. One blue coloured revolving chair – Marked as Exhibit No.
2. One wooden plank of length 75 cm -Marked as Exhibit No. DNA 2421/19 approximately
which has a side arm of length 28 cm approximately that is attached towards the base.
3. One small broken piece of a glass of -Marked as Exhibit No.DNA length approx. 13 cm
2422/19.
4. One silver gray coloured trouser that was found – Marked as Exhibit No. torn on the right
side. A belt was found attached 2423/2019 with the trouser.
5. One sealed vial contains 2 ml (approximately)-Marked as Exhibit No. DNAPost mortem
blood of deceased 2424/2019 Dr. Deben Dutta which was preserved in NAF.
6. One sealed vial contains 5 ml (approximately) – Marked as Exhibit No. DNA post mortem
blood of deceased 2425/19 Dr. Deben Dutta which was preserved in EDTA.
Result of the DNA Finger printing Analysis
DNA from the sources of the above exhibits were isolated by organic extraction
method and subjected to multiplex PCR reaction for sixteen STR loci Alleles & Amelogenin
using AmpFLSTR Identifiler Kit. The amplified products alongwith controls were run on
Automated DNA Sequencer and analysis was carried out using Genemapper IV v3.7 software
with respect to standard ladder. The resultant allele distribution in different loci in the
different exhibits was studied and it was observed:
Page No.# 58/114
1. That one of the allele of the amplified loci of Exhibit No. DNA 2420/19 (as marked)
matches with one of the respective allele in the DNA profile of Exhibit No. DNA 2423/19 (as
marked).
2. Exhibit No. DNA 2421/19, DNA 2422/19, DNA 2424/19 & DNA 2425/19 (as marked) were
subjected for DNA isolation but the DNA yield from exhibits were fragmented and could not
be amplified. Therefore, its comparison could not be done.
Material Exhibit-7 is DNA 2420/19 [One blue coloured revolving chair].
Material Exhibit-34 is DNA 2423/19 [One silver gray coloured trouser that was found torn on
the right side. A belt was found attached with the trouser].
Exhibit-34 is his report in 02 [two] pages and Exhibit-34 (1) is his signature dated
19/09/2019.
During his cross-examination, he admitted that the parcels were received by the
Director-cum-Chemical Examiner to the Government of Assam, Directorate of Forensic
Science, Assam, Kahilipara, Guwahati. He has opened the parcels in presence of one
laboratory bearer and one photographer. He alone conducted examination of the DNA part of
the exhibits.
56. PW-48/Tarun Chandra Sonowal had deposed to the effect that 10/09/2019, he
was working as Assistant Jailor, Central Jail, Jorhat. On that day, S.I. Dipankar Kumar Gogoi,
Officer-in-charge, Teok P.S.-cum-I.O. of this case came to Central Jail, Jorhat, for taking finger
print of accused Sanjay Rajowar, Son of Late Babu Rajowar of Teok Tea Estate in connection
with Teok P.S. Case 434/2019 dated Nil under Sections
302/341/342/427/506/143/144/147/148 of IPC read with Section 149/186 of IPC and read
with Section 4 of Assam Medicare Servie Persons and Medicare Service Institutions
(Prevention of Violence & Damage to Property) Act, 2011 as per order of the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat.
He had deposed that then, they produced the accused Sanjoy Rajowar before the I.O.
at Central Jail, Jorhat, and then the I.O. has taken the finger print of accused Sanjoy Rajowar
in presence of himself and Smt. Anindita Bora, Assistant Jailor, Jorhat, in two sets. Exhibit-35
Page No.# 59/114
is the first set of the finger prints of accused Sanjoy Rajowar containing in 05 [five] pages
and Exhibit-35 [1] to Exhibit-35 [5] are his signatures. Exhibit-36 is the second set of the
finger prints of accused Sanjoy Rajowar containing in 05 [five] pages and Exhibit-36 [1] to
Exhibit-36 [5] are his signatures.
In his cross-examination, he had admitted that while the I.O. has taken the finger prints
of accused Sanjoy Rajowar, no Judicial Magistrate or Executive Magistrate were present in the
Central Jail, Jorhat.
At the time of taking finger prints of the accused, only his name was asked by the I.O.
of the case. Except his name, nothing was asked by the I.O. No independent witnesses were
present at the time of taking finger prints of accused Sanjoy Rajowar, except the government
officials.
57. PW-49/Smt. Anindita Borah had deposed to the effect that on 10.09.2019, She
was working as Assistant Jailor, Central Jail, Jorhat. On that day, S.I. Dipankar Kumar Gogoi,
Officer-in-charge, Teok P.S.-cum-I.O. of this case came to Central Jail, Jorhat, as well as
Additional S.P. [Headquarter], Jorhat, for obtaining finger print of accused Sanjay Rajowar,
Son of Late Babu Rajowar of Teok Tea Estate in connection with Teok P.S. Case No. 434/2019
dated Nil under Sections 302/341/342/427/506/143/144/147/148 of IPC read with Section
149/186 of IPC and read with Section 4 of Assam Medicare Servie Persons and Medicare
Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence & Damage to Property) Act, 2011 as per order of
the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat. Then, they produced the accused Sanjay
Rajowar before the I.O. at Central Jail, Jorhat, and then the I.O. has taken the finger print of
accused Sanjay Rajowar in presence of herself and Sri Tarun Chandra Sonowal, Assistant
Jailor, Jorhat, in two sets of his both hands. Exhibit-35 is the first set of the finger prints of
accused Sanjoy Rajowar containing in 05 [five] pages and Exhibit- 35 [6] to Exhibit-35 [10]
are her signatures. Exhibit-36 is the second set of the finger prints of accused Sanjay Rajowar
containing in 05 [five] pages and Exhibit-36 [6] to Exhibit-36 [10] are her signatures.
During her cross-examination, she admitted that they have produced the accused
Sanjoy Rajowar before the I.O. Nobody has identified him. While the I.O. has taken the finger
prints of accused Sanjay Rajowar, at that time the I.O. of the case namely Sri Dipankar Gogoi
Page No.# 60/114
as well as Additional S.P. [Headquarter] Sri Prakash Sonowal was present.
No independent witnesses were present at the time of taking finger prints of accused
Sanjoy Rajowar, except the government officials.
58. PW-50/Nirmal Kumar Laskar had deposed that on 13.09.2019, while working as
S.D.J.M. (S), Jorhat, he received an order from the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Jorhat, to conduct a Test Identification Parade (T.I.P.) related to Teok P.S. Case No. 434/2019.
On the same day, he ordered the I.O. of the case to arrange for the T.I.P. at Central Jail,
Jorhat.On September 16, 2019, he went to Central Jail, Jorhat, and conducted the T.I.P. for
three witnesses: Sri Manoj Das, Sri Rupam Saikia, and Sri Jiban Tanti. The T.I.P. took place in
an open area inside the jail. The suspects were inside the jail, and the witnesses were
outside, with the inside not visible from the outside, ensuring no prior viewing of suspects by
witnesses. Afterward, the witnesses were taken inside the jail premises. During the T.I.P., no
police personnel were present inside the jail. The witnesses were then taken into a room and
instructed to identify the suspects from a lineup by touching them. Following the I.O’s
request, the witnesses wore ‘Burkhas’ to conceal their identities. Thirty-two suspects were
lined up with 180 other inmates of similar build and height, all wearing similar clothing as
much as possible.
He had deposed that in the first round, witness Sri Manoj Das identified all suspects
except Sri Kalanag Majhi and Sri Ratul Rajowar. The witness was taken back to the room, and
the lineup was reshuffled. In the second round, this witness identified all suspects except Sri
Sima Mahili and Sri Bablu Rajowar. After another reshuffle, the witness identified all 32
suspects in the third round. The same procedure was followed for the other two witnesses.
Sri Rupam Saikia identified all suspects except Sri Debeswar Rajowar and Sri Ratul Rajowar in
the first round. In the second round, this witness couldn’t identify suspect Bablu Rajowar but
suspected all others. However, in the third round, he identified all 32 suspects. The T.I.P. was
conducted in the presence of two independent witnesses: Sri Firdus Rahman, Assistant Jailor,
Central Jail, Jorhat, and Sri Keshoram Das, Head Warden. And the names of the suspects
identified by the witnesses were listed. He filled out the T.I.P. charts, which were marked as
exhibits along with the signatures of the witnesses and the two independent witnesses, all
Page No.# 61/114
signed in his presence. On the same day, the I.O. produced five other witnesses, but due to
lack of time, their T.I.P. was conducted the next day, 17.09.2019. And on that day, the I.O.
produced five witnesses: Sri Gopal Borah, Sri Paban Garh, Sri Pabitra Sahu, Sri Raju Barik,
and Sri Duleswar Majhi. The same procedures were followed as on 16.09.2019. The T.I.P.
started around 1:40 p.m. and concluded around 4:45 p.m.
He had deposed that Witness Sri Gopal Borah identified all 32 suspects in the first
round. In the second round, he identified all suspects except Sri Sanjib Rajowar and Sri
Suresh Rajowar. In the third round, this witness identified all 32 suspects. And witness Sri
Paban Garh and Sri Jiban Tanti identified all 32 suspects in all three rounds. Also, witness Sri
Pabitra Sahu could not identify Sri Kartick Bhumij, Sri Sanjoy Rajowar (Taklu), and Sri Rinku in
the first round.
59. PW-51/Diganta Das had deposed to the effect that he had seven years expertise in
the field of Finger Print. On 11.09.2019, he was working as Finger Print Expert, State Finger
Print Bureau, CID, Assam, Ulubari, Guwahati. On that day, he received one sealed parcel from
the Director, FSL, Kahilipara, Guwahati-7, in connection with Teok under Sections Nil dated
P.S. Case 434/2019 No. 302/341/342/427/506/143/144/147/148 of IPC read with Section
149/186 of IPC and read with Section 4 of Assam Medicare Service Persons and Medicare
Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence & Damage to Property) Act, 2011 which was sent
by the Additional Superintendent of Police [Headquarter], Jorhat, by his memo No.
JHT/V/19/7426 dated Jorhat the 10.09.2019. Our Director received 2 [two] exhibits. For
fingerprint expert opinion REF:- Teok P.S. Case No. 434/2019 dated Nil under
Sections 302/341/342/427/506/143/144/147/148 of IPC read with Section 149/186 of IPC
and read with Section 4 of Assam Medicare Service Persons and Medicare Service Institutions
(Prevention of Violence & Damage to Property) Act, 2011 & Ref. No. JHT/V/19/7426, Dated,
Jorhat the 10.09.2019.
Reference of Exhibits:-
1). Questioned Chance Finger Prints collected on a glass piece marked as ‘Exhibit-C’.
2). Specimen Finger prints of Sri Sanjay Rajowar, Aged-21 years, Son of Late Babu Rajowar,
Resident of Major Line, Teok Tea Estate, P.S. Teok, District- Jorhat.
In above reference, the Questioned Chance Finger Prints marked as ‘C-1’ on
the ‘Exhibit-C’ is examined and furnished Finger Print Opinion.
Page No.# 62/114
Result of Examination:-Exhibit-36 is the Specimen Fingerprints of accused Sri Sanjay Rajowar
[left hand], aged 21 years, Son of Late Babu Rajowar, Resident of Major Line, Teok Tea
Estate, P.S. Teok, District-Jorhat, contained in 05 [five] pages.
Exhibit-36 (A) is the thumb impression of right hand of Sri Sanjay Rajowar which is
marked as ‘S-1’.
Material Exhibit-21 is the broken piece of glass where we find the Chance Fingerprint
of accused Sri Sanjay Rajowar which is marked as ‘Exhibit- C1 ‘ in his report.
During cross-examination, he denied of not properly examining the Fingerprints and
had submitted a fake report.
60. PW-52/Jiban Kurmi had deposed to the effect that on 31.08.2019, around 4 p.m.,
he was in his official quarter at Teok Tea Estate. On that day, our official staff Sri Debo Jyoti
Baruah, informed him over telephone that some of the labourers were assaulting our Dr.
Deben Dutta at Teok Tea Estate Garden Hospital. He immediately rushed towards the hospital
with scooty and after reaching the hospital, he parked his scooty outside the Teok Tea Estate
Garden Hospital. Thereafter, he went inside the hospital campus and found many people on
the verandah of the hospital and also the chamber of Dr. Deben Dutta. While he was trying to
enter into the hospital at that time someone pushed him on the verandah and he fell on the
ground. He sustained injury over his hand and back. Then he saw Sri Manoj Gogoi, Senior
Manager and the Assistant Manager Sri Mukta Jyoti Baruah entering into the hospital campus.
There were about 100/150 people inside the hospital and the verandah. He then returned
back to his official quarter with his scooty. Thereafter, alongwith Sri Satyajit Hazarika, he went
to Teok FRU for medical treatment, after that he returned back to his residence. Then he saw
Dr. Deben Dutta being taken in a police vehicle to the hospital for treatment. Thereafter, he
again went to Teok Tea Estate garden hospital and there he had found local people along
with Sri Samen Kundu and Sri Mukta Jyoti Baruah. It was 7 o’clock at that time he came to
know from Assistant Manager Sri Mukta Jyoti Baruah and Sri Samen Kundu about the death
of Dr. Deben Dutta at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital.
Page No.# 63/114
He had also deposed that when he reached the verandah of the Teok T.E. garden hospital, at
that time some people were assaulting the doctor but he did not see the persons who had
assaulted the doctor at the relevant point of time. He also saw the accused standing trial
now in the verandah of the Teok T.E. garden hospital and also inside the hospital compound.
He had heard assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta by the people inside his chamber but he did not
witness the incident of assault.
In his cross-examination he stated that his statement to the police was recorded 4-5 days
after the incident. He couldn’t recall if he told the Investigating Officer the name of his
assaulter on the day of the occurrence.
He had stated to the effect that he do not know the names of the person whom he was
seeing in the court in front of the camera but he had seen them in the hospital verandah.
(On being asked the following accused persons told their names i.e Sri Sivcharan Mahili, Sri
Siba Mahil, Sri Pritam Majli, Sri Milan Rajowar, Sri Kalicharan mahili,Arjun Majhi, Rinku Bakti,
Sri Jabra Majhi). He also saw the accused Sri Upen Bhumij near the doctor’s chamber door.
He had also deposed to the effect that he saw the accused Sri Sanjoy Rajowar in front of the
camera in the hospital verandah. He had also deposed that he saw the accused persons
whose names he did not know near/infront of the door of the chamber of the doctor. (on
being asked the accused persons told their names as Ratul Rajowar and Sri Sanjoy Rajowar,
Sri Sanjib Rajowar).
He had also stated to the effect that the saw the following accused persons who were
present in the varanda of the hospital , namely accused Sri Debeswar Rajowar, Sri Manoj
Majhi, Sri Sanju Majhi, Sri Ajay Majhi, Sri Kartick Bhumij, Sri Rameswar Bhumij.
He had also stated to the effect that he saw the following accused persons near the
door of the doctor’s chamber namely Sri Suresh Rajowar, Sri Rinku Majhi. He did not see the
rest of the accused persons he had seen in the camera on that day.
He had also stated that he was at the hospital for approximately 30-50 minutes to an
hour and saw people leaving. For about an hour he was near the place of occurance and the
saw the accused persons whom he had named in the court in the hospital verandah and near
the doctor’s chamber and that he did not see who had assaulted Dr. Deben Dutta on the day
of the occurrence.
61. PW-53/Md. Abdus Sattar had deposed to the effect that on 30.09.2019, he was
working as Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat. On 02.09.2019, some of the accused
persons of Teok P.S. Case No. 434/2019 were produced before him. On 06.09.2019, the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jorhat, entrusted him to record the statements of
witnesses namely, (1) Sri Manoj Das, (2) Sri Rupam Saikia, (3) Sri Gopal Bora, (4) Sri Paban
Garh, (5) Sri Jiban Tanti, (6) Sri Pabitra Sahu, (7) Sri Raju Bank under Section 164 of Cr. P.C.
Page No.# 64/114
On that day, the record was put up before him but on that same day, the I.O. had verbally
appealed before him that due to security reasons, witnesses could not be produced before
him on that day. Thereafter, on 07.09.2019, all the aforesaid seven numbers of witnesses
were produced before him and he recorded their respective statements under Section 164 of
Cr. P.C. in his official chamber. None of the aforesaid seven numbers of witnesses were
literate as such he put their R.T.I. on their deposition sheets.
Exhibit-48 is the statement of witness Sri Pabitra Sahu and Exhibit-48 (1) to Exhibit-48 (3)
are his respective signatures in the aforesaid statement of Sri Pabitra Sahu.
Exhibit-49 is the statement of witness Sri Raju Barik and Exhibit-49 (1) to Exhibit-49 (3) are
his respective signatures in the aforesaid statement of Sri Raju Barik.
Exhibit-50 is the statement of witness Sri Rupam Saikia and Exhibit-50 (1) to Exhibit- 50 (5)
are his his respective signatures in the aforesaid statement of Sri Rupam Saikia.
Exhibit-51 is the statement of witness Sri Gopal Bora and Exhibit-51 (1) to Exhibit- 51 (4) are
his his respective signatures in the aforesaid statement of Sri Raju Barik.
Exhibit-52 is the statement of witness Sri Paban Garh and Exhibit-52 (1) to Exhibit- 52 (4)
are his respective signatures in the aforesaid statement of Sri Raju Barik.
Exhibit-53 is the statement of witness Sri Jiban Tanti and Exhibit-53 (1) to Exhibit- 53 (2) are
his respective signatures in the aforesaid statement of Sri Raju Barik.
Exhibit-54 is the statement of witness Sri Manoj Das and Exhibit-54 (1) to Exhibit- 54 (5) are
his respective signatures in the aforesaid statement of Sri Raju Barik.
He had deposed that after recording the statements of the above-named witnesses, he had
read over the same to them and thereafter he had taken their respective thumb impressions
over their respective statements. After recording the statements of the above-named
witnesses, he handed over them to the investigating officer of the case.
In his cross examination, he had stated that before recording their statements, he read over
the contents of the ejahar to all the witnesses but he did not reflected the same in their
statements.
He stated had that nothing was recorded in his order-sheet and in the respective
statements of witnesses as to whether he had put any questions to any of the witnesses.
After recording the statement of the witnesses, he read over the same to each of the
witnesses and after that they put their respective thumb impressions on their depositions
willfully before him.
62. PW-54/Sankar Chandra Rabha had deposed to the effect that on 11.09.2019, he
was working as Scientific Officer, Serology Division, Directorate of Forensic Science,
Kahilipara, Guwahati. On that day, he received a parcel through the Director in connection
with Teok P.S. Case No. 434/2019 under Sections 302/341/342/427/506/143/144/147/148 of
Page No.# 65/114
IPC read with Sections 149/186 of IPC; read with Section 4 of Assam Medical Service Person
& Medical Service Institution [Prevention of Violence & Damage of Property] Act, 2011.
He had further deposed to the effect that he received four parcels wherein there were
four exhibits. After opening the parcel, the following articles namely i) one blue colured
revolving chair marked as “A” wrapped woth polythene suspected to contain stain blood.
Marked by him as Sero-4290-A. Material was exhibited as Exhibit-7. ii) One wooden stick (as
stated to be table leg) marked as suspected to contain blood stain. Marked by him as Sero-
4290-B. Material was exhibited as Exhibit-8. iii) One small broken glass piece suspected to
contain stain of blood. Marked by him as Sero-4290-C. Material was exhibited as Exhibit-21.
iv) One yellow colour big size seal envelope marked as “D” with one grey colour long pant
with belt suspected to contain stain of blood which was marked by him as Sero-4290-D.
Material was exhibited as Exhibit-34.
Result of the examination was that Sero-4290-A, Sero-4290-B, Sero-4290-C, Sero-4290-D
gave positive test for human blood of group “O”. His report was Exhibited as exhibit-56.
Cross examination was declined.
63. PW-55, Rupam Lachit had deposed to the effect that on 11.09.2019, he was
working as Scientific Officer, Toxicology Division, Directorate of Forensic Science, Kahilipara,
Guwahati. On that day, he received a parcel through the Director in connection with. Teok
P.S. Case No. 434/2019 under Sections 302/341/342/427/506/143/144/147/148 of IPC read
with Sections 149/186 of IPC; read with Section 4 of Assam Medical Service Person &
Medical Service Institution [Prevention of Violence & Damage of Property] Act, 2011, which
he received from his In-charge.
The parcel consisted of 3 (three) exhibits in three sealed plastic jars enclosed in a sealed
carton box with cloth cover which was sealed with the seal impression of Additional S.P.,
Jorhat, Assam.
DESCRIPTION OF ARTICLES:-
1). One plastic jar containing stomach with its contents which were marked by him as Tox-
742/19 (a).
2). One plastic jar containing portion of liver and half of each kidney which were marked by
him Tox-742/19 (b).
3). One plastic jar containing sample of preservatives, i.e., saturated solution of common salt
which were marked by him as Tox-7429/19 [c].
The above-mentioned articles were found to be sealed with the seal impression of
Department of Forensic Medicine, Jorhat Medical College & Hospital.
RESULT OF EXAMINATION:-
No poison was detected in the Exhibit Nos. Tox-742/19 [a], Tox- 742/19 [b] and Tox-742/19
[c].
Exhibit-57 is the covering letter issued by Directorate of Forensic Science, Assam and Exhibit-
Page No.# 66/114
57 (1) is the signature of Sri Gajendra Nath Deka, Director-cum-Chemical Examiner to the
Government of Assam which I know.
Exhibit-58 is his report wherein Exhibit-58 (1) is his signature.
Cross examination was declined by the learned defense counsel.
64. PW-56/Sri Dipankar Gogoi had deposed to the effect that on 31.08.2019, he was
working as Officer-in-charge, Teok P.S. On that day, at about 3/3.30 p.m., he came
towards Jorhat to attend the meeting in the S.P. Office, Jorhat and when he reached
Kenduguri Bye-Pass, he received one phone call from one Sri Sarangapani Saikia, reporter
of Web-portal [N.E. News], and one local reporter to the effect that law & order situation
has arisen at Teok tea garden hospital and in the garden hospital some people were
assaulting the garden staff of the Teok Tea Estate. Then, S.I. of Police Khanindra Nath and
A.S.I. Apurba Kalita were directed by him to proceed towards the place of occurrence, i.e.,
Teok tea garden hospital. In the meantime, he received several phone calls from other
persons and then he informed the S.P., Jorhat and Addl. S.P., Jorhat and with their
permission, he returned back to Teok P.S. He then informed the In-charges of Lahdoigarh,
Selenghat and Bamunpukhuri Outposts to move towards the place of occurrence and also
instructed one Constable Sri Diganta Kalita, to inform the 108 Ambulance and to move to
the place of occurrence. He also asked A.S.I. Tarun Sarmah [DSB] to inform about the
incident to the Executive Magistrate.
He had deposed that when he returned back to Teok P.S. on the way he went to
Lahdoigarh O.P. and took along with him S.I. Nurtaz Ali along with some police personnel
to Teok Tea Estate. When he reached at Teok tea garden hospital, he found about
200/250 people at the tea garden hospital. Then he tried to make the people there
understand and he somehow managed to enter into the garden hospital from the back
side and there he found one person lying on a stretcher whose name was Sri Samra Majhi
and also found another person sitting on a chair whom his staff identified him as the
doctor of the aforesaid garden hospital. He noticed his condition serious and blood oozing
out from his right leg. Then he noticed the mob gathered there sent back the 108
Page No.# 67/114
Ambulance. Then he asked A.S.I. Nurtaz Ali to arrange his vehicle. Then he asked Nurtaz
Ali to cope with the mob, and in the meantime, they will try to take the doctor in his
vehicle from the backside of the garden hospital. Thereafter, Nurtaz Ali took the Doctor in
the police vehicle to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital for medical treatment. After
evacuation of the Doctor from the hospital, the mob pacified.
He had deposed that on evacuation of the Doctor, he came to know that on that day,
at about 2.20 p.m., one Samra Majhi, who fell down and sustained head injury was taken
to the garden hospital by 6/7 persons. Then, the dresser of the hospital namely Sri
Subhash Rajowar informed the Staff Nurse Smt. Ranjula Hazarika Borah. The staff nurse
came and informed Dr. Deben Dutta that one patient had come to the hospital. In the
meantime, Dr. Deben Dutta arrived at the hospital and then the mob started assaulting
him and threatening him and confined him inside his chamber. Thereafter, the mob
became unruly. Then Subhash Rajowar informed the Garden Manager about the incident.
Thereafter, the mob chased away the staff nurse Smt. Ranjula Hazarika from the garden
hospital. In the meantime, the Welfare Officer of the tea garden arrived at the place of
incident and the Welfare Officer was also chased away by the mob. In the meantime, the
mob started assaulting the Doctor. UBC Debasish Baruah, ABC Ghanakanta Mili, S.I.
Khanindra Nath and some BSF personnels arrived at the place of occurrence and they
tried to interfere the mob in assaulting the doctor in the doctor’s chamber. On arriving at
the place of occurrence, they have found 30/35 people inside the doctor’s chamber
assaulting the doctor and the Garden Manager and some of the people of tea garden tried
to interfere the same. The police personnel then tried to take away the doctor outside the
room but could not succeed as the mob prevented them from taking the doctor outside
his room. As the police personnel were less in number than the mob present there but
they somehow managed to get the mob out of the room of the doctor and tried to save
him.
He had deposed that at that time Sri Gautam Baruah, UBC and Sri Diganta Kalita,
UBC also arrived at the place of occurrence and tried to control the mob. In the meantime,
Page No.# 68/114
Sri Bhaskar Jyoti Rajbongshi, Circle Officer, Teok, also arrived at the place of occurrence,
and he also tried to pacify the mob. Thereafter, ASI Apurba Kalita alongwith BSF personnels
arrived there and they also tried to control the mob. In the meantime, one 108 Ambulance
arrived at the garden hospital but the aforesaid vehicle was chased away by the mob.
Thereafter, S.I. Keshab Mahanta of Teok P.S. alongwith BSF personnel arrived at there and
they also tried to control the mob. In the meantime, he also arrived at the place of
occurrence. Then he controlled the mob and sent the doctor Deben Dutta to the JMCH in his
police vehicle through the backside of the garden hospital. When he was present at the
place of occurrence, at about 6.30 p.m., he received information from Murtaz Ali over phone
that Dr. Deben Dutta was declared dead at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital as ‘brought
dead’. Thereafter, he had cordoned off the hospital and he had seized the articles. He took
photograph of the articles lying at the place of occurrence and the articles damaged by the
mob.
He had also deposed that it is to be mentioned here that on receipt of the phone call
about the incident, he informed at the Teok P.S. and then S.I. Khanindra Nath has recorded
G.D. Entry No. 526 dated 31/08/2019 at about 4.08 p.m.
He had further deposed that he also prepared the Sketch Map of the place of occurrence with
index and also seized the articles related to the place of occurrence. Having seized the
articles, he examined the seizure witnesses and they gave their respective signatures in the
seizure-list. Thereafter, he returned back to Teok P.S.
Thereafter, he obtained the certified copy of the G.D. Entry from the Sheristadar of the police
station. In the meantime, Sri Manoj Gogoi, Garden Manager, gave an F.I.R. at the police
about the incident and then he closed the MCD vide G.D. Entry No. 534 dated 31.08.2019.
Exhibit-59 is the certified copy of the extract G.D. Entry No. 526 to 533. Exhibit-59 (1) to
Exhibit-59 (3) are the signatures of ASI Sarif Hussain who certified the G.D. entries.
Exhibit-60 is the certified copy of the G.D. Entry No. 534 dated 31/08/2019 which were
certified by him. Exhibit-60 (1) to Exhibit-60 (6) are his signatures.
Exhibit-61 to Exhibit-80 are the various photographs taken by him of the incident at the P.O
All the photographs were taken by Vivo mobile phone on 31.08.2019 from 6.46 p.m. to 6.54
p.m. and the prints were taken out from the computer and printer of his police station.
Exhibit-81 is the Sketch Map of the place of occurrence showing the verandah of the garden
Page No.# 69/114
hospital. Exhibit-81 (1) is his signature therein.
Exhibit-82 is the Sketch Map of the doctor’s chamber of the place of occurrence of the garden
hospital. Exhibit-82 (1) is his signature therein.
He had also deposed that on the same day at about 7 p.m., he also seized 30 [thirty]
numbers of Material Exhibit-1 to Material Exhibit-30 vide seizure-list [Exhibit-1]. Exhibit-1 (10)
is his signature therein. He had seized the above-mentioned articles in presence of witnesses.
After seizing the articles preparing seizure-list, he kept the articles at the Malkhana of Teok
P.S. After receiving the ejahar from Sri Manoj Gogoi, Senior Manager, Teok T.E., at about
10.10. p.m., at Teok P.S., he registered the same vide Teok P.S. Case No. 434/2019 under
Sections 302/341/342/427/506/143/144/147/148 of IPC read with Section 149/186 of IPC;
read with Section 4 of The Assam Medicare Service Persons and Medicine Service Institutions
[Prevention of Violence and Damage to Property] Act, 2011. He recorded the statement of
the first informant at the police station itself. Exhibit-2 as the F.I.R. in 05 [five] pages wherein
Exhibit-2 (8) is his signature. Exhibit-2 (6) is the printed form of F.I.R. and Exhibit-2 (9) is his
signature.
He had further deposed that on the next day, he visited the place of occurrence, examined
the witnesses as per provision of Section 161 of Cr.P.C. and arrested the accused persons and
thereafter forwarded them to the court. On visiting the place of occurrence on the next day,
he found 07 [seven] witnesses who have witnessed the occurrence but he did not record
their statements as they expressed apprehension/threat to their lives. He recorded their
statements of the said 07 [seven] witnesses under the Witness Protection Scheme on
05/09/2019. He arrested 22 [twenty-two] accused persons and forwarded them to the court,
on 01/09/2019. Thereafter, Nurtaz Ali, S.I. of Police, Teok P.S., had seized the articles of Dr.
Deben Dutta. He had got the SCD No.1 from S.I. Nurtaz Ali wherefrom he found that Dr.
Deben Dutta was taken to Jorhat Medical College & Hospital and the wearing apparels of the
doctor were seized by the I.O. vide seizure-list [Exhibit-4] in presence of other witnesses.
And, after getting the information about the death of Dr. Deben Dutta he received the
Cadaveor Report from Jorhat Medical College & Hospital which is exhibited as Exhibit-5. Md.
Nurtaz Ali also made prayer to the District Magistrate for calling an Executive Magistrate for
holding inquest over the dead body of Dr. Deben Dutta. On the prayer made by the I.O.,
Executive Magistrate Sri Rajib Gogoi, Circle Officer, Attached to West Revenue Circle, Jorhat,
arrived at Jorhat Medical College & Hospital and held inquest over the dead body of Dr.
Deben Dutta. Exhibit-83 is the order of the District Magistrate to the Executive Magistrate to
hold inquest over the dead body. Exhibit-3 is the Inquest Report.
He had deposed that on the next day, i.e., 02.09.2019, he arrested 08 [eight] more accused
persons and forwarded them to the court. On 04.09.2019, he received another F.I.R. from
the son of Dr. Deben Dutta [deceased] namely Sri Manjit Dutta. As the case has been already
registered, he treated the same F.I.R. as statement and enclosed the same with the case
diary. Exhibit-32 is the said F.I.R. submitted by Sri Manjit Dutta wherein Exhibit-32 (2) is his
signature. On 04.09.2019, he arrested the accused persons namely Sri Manoj Majhi and Sri
Page No.# 70/114
Rinku Majhi and forwarded them to the court.
He had also deposed that thereafter, he had made a prayer before the court for protection of
some of the witnesses under the Witness Protection Scheme. An interim order was passed by
the court to conceal the identity of the said witnesses under the Witness Protection Scheme.
On 05.09.2019, he recorded the statement of the witnesses under the Witness Protection
Scheme. On 06/09/2019, the 07 [seven] witnesses under the Witness Protection Scheme
were produced before the learned court. On 07.09.2019, the Hon’ble Court recorded the
statement of the aforesaid witnesses as per provision of Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, he
collected the viscera of Dr. Deben Dutta after his post-mortem examination and seized the
same preparing seizure-list and also collected the post-mortem report of the deceased. After
seizing the viscera, he produced the same before the learned court. On the next day, he sent
the viscera to the F.S.L., Guwahati, for expert’s opinion.
He had deposed that on 10.09.2019, he made a prayer before the learned court for
according permission to collect finger prints of accused Sri Sanjay Rajowar, Son of Late Babu
Rajowar and on being allowed by the learned court, collected the finger prints of the accused
Sri Sanjay Rajowar from the Central Jail, Jorhat, and then along with the seized articles, he
sent the same to the Bureau of Fingerprints, Assam, for examination. Exhibit-35 & Exhibit-36
are the fingerprints of accused Sri Sanjay Rajowar, Son of Late Babu Rajowar, in 02 [two]
sets. Exhibit-35 (11) & Exhibit-36 (11) are his signatures therein. He also sent the blue
colored revolving chair with bloodstain [Material Exhibit-7], Material Exhibit-8, Material
Exhibit-21 and Material Exhibit-34 to the F.S.L., Kahilipara, Guwahati, for expert’s opinion.
Vide Exhibit-8, he seized vial containing blood sample of 2ml of Dr. Deben Dutta which were
collected during post-mortem examination of Dr. Deben Dutta and vial containing blood
sample of 5ml of Dr. Deben Dutta which were collected during post-mortem examination
[EDTA] and plastic jar containing the visceras of Dr. Deben Dutta and plastic jar containing
preservative of common salt which were sent to the Director, F.S.L., Guwahati, vide Exhibit-84
[containing in 05 (five) pages]. These were sent by Special Messenger by the Addl. S.P.
[Headquarter], Jorhat, Sri Prakash Sonowal to the Director, F.S.L., Guwahati, for ascertaining
the facts as mentioned in Exhibit-84. Exhibit-84 (1) to Exhibit-84 (5) are the signatures of Sri
Prakash Sonowal, Addl. S.P. [Headquarter], Jorhat, which he knew.
He had deposed that on 13.09.2019, he got information that one Sri Duleswar Majhi was also
eyewitness of the case and he could identify the accused persons. He made a prayer before
the court for holding T.I.P. [Test Identification Parade] for identification of the accused
persons by the aforesaid witness. Altogether, 08 [eight] witnesses came forward and on the
same day the Hon’ble Court fixed the day for holding T.I.P. at Central Jail, Jorhat, on
16.09.2019 & 17.09.2019. Accordingly, T.I.P. was held at Central Jail, Jorhat on the
aforementioned dates. Sri Riju Kumar Saikia and Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound, journalists, have
recorded the video of the occurrence and then he had issued notice to them to furnish the
videos. Vide Exhibit-9, I asked Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound to produce the video in C.D. as per
Section 65 (B) of the Evidence Act. The same was received by Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound. Exhibit-
9 (2) is his signature. Accordingly, Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound handed over to him 18 [eighteen]
Page No.# 71/114
numbers of compact discs vide Material Exhibit-35 to Material Exhibit-52. He also provided
requisite certificate under Section 65 (B) of the Evidence Act against each of the Material
Exhibits. Exhibit-10 to Exhibit-27 are the certificates issued by Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound,
journalist.
He had deposed that he also issued a notice to Sri Riju Kumar Saikia, journalist, to provide
video clips of the fateful day of the occurrence on which Dr. Deben Dutta was brutally
assaulted by the mob of Teok T.E. Accordingly, Sri Riju Kumar Saikia handed over to him 02
[two] numbers of compact discs vide Material Exhibit-53 and Material Exhibit-54. He also
provided requisite certificates under Section 65 (B) of the Evidence Act against each of the
Material Exhibits. Exhibit-29 to Exhibit- 30 are the certificates issued by Sri Utpal Jyoti
Khound, journalist.
After getting the compact discs, he also requested them not to destroy the original. Then he
called witness Sri Duleswar Majhi to identify the accused persons. Accordingly, he came to the
police station. He showed him the videos of the date of incident and accordingly he identified
the accused persons by their names & address. Thereafter, he took screen printing of the
videos wherein witness Sri Duleswar Majhi identified the accused persons. He exhibited
Material Exhibit-55 to Material Exhibit-126 which are the photo print out of the accused
persons
He had deposed that on 02.09.2019, he requested the Senior Medical Officer, Jorhat
Police Hospital, Jorhat to give opinion about the injuries of Sri Sanjay Rajowar, Son of Late
Babu Rajowar, Sri Ratul Rajowar and Sri Rinku Majhi, as there was strike of doctors at
Jorhat Medical College & Hospital on that day due to murder of Dr. Deben Dutta on
31.08.2019. Then the Senior Medical Officer has given opinion that he has found cut injury
over the left palm of accused Sri Sanjay Rajowar of size 2″ x 2″ x 1 inch, not active
bleeding. Accused Sri Ratul Rajowar had injury over his right little finger. Accused Sri Rinku
Majhi, one cut injury seen on the left arm approximately of size 10″ and 16 stitches were
given over the aforesaid injuries. Exhibit-85 is the requisition for medical examination of
aforesaid accused persons and report thereof issued by Dr. N.N. Rahman, the Senior
Medical Officer, Jorhat Police Hospital. Exhibit-85 (1) as the signature of Dr. N.N. Rahman,
which he knew. Exhibit-85 (2) to Exhibit-85 (4) as his signatures.
He had deposed that on 03.09.2019, he forwarded the three accused persons to
the Senior Medical Officer, Jorhat Police Hospital wherein the doctor examined accused
Sri Siba Mahali and found one cut injury over right middle finger by glass. No active
Page No.# 72/114
bleeding seen. One accused Sri Kalanag Majhi was found with one cut injury over his
right leg. Exhibit-86 is the requisition for Medical examination and report thereof issued
by Dr. N.N. Rahman, the Senior Medical Officer, Jorhat Police Hospital. Exhibit-86 (1) as
the signature of Dr. N.N. Rahman, which he knew. Exhibit-86 (2) to Exhibit-86 (3) as his
signatures. It is evident that all the aforementioned accused persons received those
injuries by glass pieces as they were present and involved in the incident of assault of Dr.
Deben Dutta.
He had deposed that thereafter, on completion of investigation and having been
found a well established case under Sections 302/341/342/427/506/ 143/144/147/148 of
IPC read with Section 149/186 of IPC and read with Section 4 of Assam Medicare Service
Persons and Medicare Service Institutions (Prevention of Violence & Damage to Property)
Act, 2011, I laid charge-sheet against the accused persons namely, Sri Sanjoy Rajowar,
Son of Late Babu Rajowar, Sri Sanjib Rajowar, Sri Suresh Rajowar, Sri Ajay Majhi, Sri
Debeswar Rajowar, Son of Late Samlal Rajowar, Sri Upendra Bhumij @ Kishore Bhumiz,
Sri Ratul Rajowar, Sri Bablu Rajowar, Sri Anil Majhi, Sri Arjun Majhi, Sri Arun Majhi, Sri
Bijay Rajowar, Sri Bolin Rajowar, Sri Dipak Rajowar, Sri Gulu Dev Majhi, Sri Hari Majhi, Sri
Milan Rajowar, Sri Pritam Majhi, Sri Pritom Majhi @ Sotu Bhai, Sri Rinku Majhi @ Batu, Sri
Michilal Majhi @ Jabra, Sri Sanju Majhi, Sri Sibcharan Mahali @ Batu, Sri Debeswar
Rajowar @ Deba, Son of Late Jogeswar Rajowar, Sri Sanjay Rajowar @ Toklu, Sri Deba
Rajowar, Sri Rahimsh Bhumij, Sri Kalicharan Mahali, Sri Kartick Bhumij, Sri Rahul Rajowar,
Sri Rinku Bakti, Sri Siba Mahali @ Bijit and Sri Kalanag Mahali to stand trial in the court
under the said sections of law. The investigation was conducted by him under the
supervision of Special Investigation Team headed by Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Easter Region, Assam cum-Head of Special Investigation team [SIT], Dr. G.V. Sivaprasad,
(2) Sri Vaibhav C. Nimbalkar, IPS, S.P., Jorhat-cum- Himmber of Special Investigation
Team, and (3) Sri Prakash Sonowal, APS, Add. S.P. [HQ], Jorhat. Exhibit-87 is the charge-
sheet containging 39 [thirty-nine] pages and Exhibit-87 (1) to Exhibit-87 (39) are his
signatures thereon. Exhibit-87 (40) is the signature of Sri Prakash Sonowal, Addl. S.P.
[Headquarter], Jorhat, which he knew. Exghibit-87 (41) is the signature of the then S.P.,
Page No.# 73/114
Jorhat, Sri Vaibhav C. Nimbalkar, which he knew. Exhibit-87 (43) is the signature of Dr.
G.V. Sivaprasad, Deputy Inspector General of Police, Assam-cum-Head of the
Special Investigation Team [SIT].
65. In his cross-examination, he had stated that he received the FIR on 31/08/2019 at
10:10 PM. He had admitted that he did not receive ant FIR from the informant Sri Manoj
Gogoi, Senior Manager Teok T.E. nor did he examine him on the same day.
He had also stated that the first informant has mentioned the name of 30 [thirty]
accused in the F.I.R. Apart from those 30 [thirty] accused, he arrested two more accused
namely Sri Kalanag Majhi and Sri Manoj Majhi on 03.09.2019 & 04.09.2019 respectively,
on the basis of investigation made by him in connection with the case. In the statement
under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. of the witnesses he did not mentioned the date on which he
had recorded the statement of witnesses but he had mentioned the same in the case
diary and mentioned as annexures.
He had stated that on 31.08.2019, he examined witnesses namely, Sri Souhimn
Kundu, Sri Kalyanjit Bora and the informant Sri Manoj Gogoi, Senior Manager, Teok T.E.
On 01.09.2019, he had examined witnesses namely, Sri Jiban Kurmi, Smt. Ranjula
Hazarika Borah, Sri Rabi Mahali, Sri Bikash Gowala, Sri Subhash Rajowar, Sri Dhiraj
Mahali, Sri Mohan Mahali, Sri Naresh Robidas, Sri Sarangapani Saikia, Sri Bhaskar Jyoti
Rajbongshi, Sri Khanindra Nath, Sri Debasish Baruah, Sri Ghana Kanta Mili, Sri Aditya Sow,
Sri Kamal Das, Sri Tarun Sarmah, Sri Bhubon Handique, Sri Diganta Kalita, Sri Gautam
Baruah, Sri Apurba Kalita, Sri Rabi Rajak, Sri Mridul Borah, Sri Keshab Mohan, Md. Nurtaj
Ali, Sri Ashok Sonar, Sri Atanu Goswami and Sri Padma Kanta Saikia.
In his cross examination he had stated that on 02.09.2019, 03.09.2019,
04.09.2019, he did not record statement of any witnesses. On 05.09.2019, he had
examined witnesses namely, Sri Manoj Das, Sri Rupam Saikia, Sri Paban Garh, Sri Gopal
Borah, Sri Jiban Tanti, Sri Pabitra Sahu and Sri Raju Barik. He had stated that on
13.09.2019, he examined Sri Duleswar Majhi [PW-54] and he did not arrest any of the
Page No.# 74/114
accused persons.
He had further stated that on 01.09.2019, he arrested accused namely, Sri Sanjoy
Rajowar, Sri Sanjib Rajowar, Sri Suresh Rajowar, Sri Ajay Majhi, Sri Debeswar Rajowar, Sri
Upendra Bhumij, Sri Ratul Rajowar, Sri Bablu Rajowar, Sri Anil Majhi, Sri Arjun Majhi, Sri Arun
Majhi, Sri Bijay Rajowar, Sri Bolin Rajowar, Sri Dipak Rajowar, Sri Guludev Majhi, Sri Hari
Majhi, Sri Milan Rajowar, Sri Pritam Majhi, Sri Rinku Majhi, Sri Misilal Majhi, Sri Sanju Majhi
and Sri Sivcharan Mahali and on 03.09.2019, he arrested the accused namely, Sri Debeswar
Rajowar, Sri Kartick Bhumij, Sri Sanjay Rajowar, Son of Late Gopi Rajowar, Sri Kalicharan
Mahali, Sri Rahimswar Bhumij, Sri Siva Mahali @ Bijit, Sri Rahul Rajowar and Sri Kalanag
Majhi and arrested the accused namely, Sri Manoj Majhi and Sri Rinku Bakti on 04.09.2019
He had further stated that he also collected the video footage on 14.09.2019 from Sri
Utpal Jyoti Khound and Sri Raju Kumar Saikia. Witness Sri Duleswar Majhi [PW-54] has
identified the accused persons in the video footage on 15.09.2019.
He had stated that he arrested all the accused persons prior to the identification of the
accused persons by witness Sri Duleswar Majhi [PW-54] on 15.09.2019. The two persons
who had furnished the video footage in connection with the murder of Dr. Deben Dutta have
given a certificate under Section 65-B of The Evidence Act, except that he had not enquired
about the authenticity and storage of the same.
He had also stated that he did not seize the mobile phones by which the two persons
had recorded the video of the incident of assault upon Dr. Deben Dutta. From confidential
source, he came to know the presence of 07 [seven] witnesses protected under Witness
Protection Scheme at the place of occurrence.
He had denied the suggestion that he kept the 07 [seven] witnesses protected under
Witness Protection Scheme, under his custody, but he kept them at Jorhat P.S. as they
complained about their security check.
He had stated that he did not kept the witnesses namely, Sri Gopal Borah [PW-36] for
02 [two] days in police custody, Sri Rupam Saikia [PW-37] for 04 [four] days in police
custody, Sri Paban Garh [PW-38] for 07 [seven] days in police custody, Sri Jiban Tanti [PW-
Page No.# 75/114
39] for 07 [seven] days in police custody, Sri Raju Barik [PW-40] in police custody for 10 [ten]
days. He denied the suggestion that he kept them with him and tutored them. He had
denied the suggestion that the above witnesses have not asked for police protection and
there was security threat to them.
He had denied the suggestions that there was no any threat to the 07 [seven]
witnesses who were protected under Witness Protection Scheme.
66. In his cross examination had also stated as follows regarding his examination of the
witnesses under section 161 Cr.P.C. Witness Sri Souhimn Kundu [PW-1] during his statement
under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. did not state before him that he witnessed Sri Manoj Majhi, Sri
Kalanag Majhi, Sri Ratul Rajowar @ Hasim, Sri Kartick Bhumij and Sri Sanju Majhi at the place
of occurrence.
He had admitted the suggestion that witness Sri Souhimn Kundu [PW-1] stated before
him that “the doctor will not be allowed to go for treatment and we want him to die out
here”.
Witness Sri Kailyanjeet Borah [PW-2] during his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.
did not state before him that “on 31.08.2019 while he was present in his office chamber
located at the factory campus, Teok T.E., he was informed by Sri Manoj Gogoi, Senior
Manager, Teok T.E., that he was informed by someone that Dr. Deben Dutta was assaulted at
Garden Tea Hospital; that he along with Sri Arup Borgohain, Senior Manager, Agri Business,
Teok T.E. went to the Teok tea garden hospital; that on reaching Teok T.E. hospital, he saw a
gathering of about 150/200 people shouting and rioting on the verandah of tea garden
hospital as well as in the car parking area; that he saw Sri Jibon Kurmi, Welfare Officer of
Teok T.E. standing near the jeep of the Garden Manager Sri Manoj Gogoi, visibly shaken and
bleeding from his right elbow; that then he thought that he should not go inside but he
should inform the police; that someone told him that police had already been informed but
yet to arrive; that he saw Sri Souhimn Kundu, Assistant Manager, Khanikar Dalim Division,
Teok T.E., coming in a motorcycle; that then with him he went to Teok P.S.; that on reaching
there, one police staff informed them that police party had already left for Teok T.E.; that
Page No.# 76/114
when they returned to Teok T.E., one way he informed Sri Sanjay Singh, General Manager of
Teok T.E. about the incident; that he advised him to be in the office campus and not to go to
the hospital campus so that he can keep contact with his senior officials; that so he got down
near his factory gate and Sri Souman Kundu went to the hospital; that he kept enquiring
through telephone what was going on inside the hospital and came to know that Dr. Deben
Dutta had been cut on one of his legs and he was profusely bleeding; that after sometime he
again called and came to know that 108 Ambulance had arrived at the garden hospital but he
was not been allowed to enter; that on hearing this, he called Additional S.P. Sri Imdad Ali
and informed him that more additional party would be required to take out and send the Dr.
Deben Dutta to the hospital for medical treatment; that he assured him of his help; that after
sometime, he saw one vehicle with full police personnel going towards the garden hospital
and that thereafter he came to know that police party could manage to taken Dr. Deben
Dutta out of the hospital and sent for medical treatment to Jorhat Medical College &
Hospital”.
Witness Sri Manoj Gogoi [PW-3] during his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.
stated before him that “a crowd of about 40 people illegally entered the garden hospital and
threatened the hospital chowkidar Sri Suresh Robidas and also threatened the nurse Smt.
Ranjul Bora and stopped the hospital dresser Sri Subhash Rajowar from trying to protect the
doctor and later, Sri Jibon Kurmi, the Welfare Officer also came to help Dr. Deben Dutta but
he was also assaulted and sent away”. This witness also stated before him that “Dr. Deben
Dutta, other than fist blows and kicks was also assaulted by broken glass pieces”.
Witness Sri Debasish Baruah [PW-10] during his statement under Section 161 of
Cr.P.C. did not state before him that “in order to prevent the crowd from further entering into
the room, he along with his colleague Sri Ghanakanta Mili as well as one BSF were blocking
the door”.
Witness Md. Nurtaz Ali [PW-13] during his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. did
not state before him that “he saw pieces of broken glass panes of windows and doors lying in
the room of Dr. Deben Dutta; that though 108 Ambulance was called but same was not
Page No.# 77/114
allowed to get inside to take Dr. Deben Dutta to the hospital for medical treatment and that
injured Dr. Deben Dutta was in a sub-conscious state”.
Witness Sri Mukta Jyoti Baruah [PW-28] during his statement under Section 161 of
Cr.P.C. did not state before him that : “he alongwith one staff named Prakash Rajowar,
blocked the back door of the chamber; that the “crowd present inside the doctor’s chamber
pushed 2/3 police personnel and they also stopped the police personnel from doing their duty
that 30/40 persons who were already present inside the chamber, started assaulting Dr.
Deben Dutta by pushing away Sri Manoj Gogoi”; “that the condition of Dr. Deben Dutta was
very bad as he was punched in his face”.
This witness stated before him that ” one police officer folded trouser of Dr. Deben
Dutta which he was wearing and then he could see one cut mark on right thigh of Dr. Deben
Dutta where from blood was oozing out and in order to stop bleeding from the cut portion of
Dr. Deben Dutta, one police staff with the help of a saline pipe, he tied the cut portion; that
Sri Manoj Gogoi, Manager, went outside and requested the crowd to allow to take Dr. Deben
Dutta for medical attention, but no one listened to him, rather they were shouting that Dr.
Deben Dutta has to die here only; that as per direction of Sri Manoj Gogoi, Manager, he
stayed back at the garden hospital itself in order to find out the names of the persons
present in the crowd and to ascertain why the incident had taken place; that later on, on
enquiry, from Sri Souhimn Kundu he came to know that the whole incident had taken place
due to instigation by accused Sri Manoj Majhi.”
Witness Sri Manoj Das [PW-32] during his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.
stated before him that ” accused persons namely, Sri Rahimesh Bhumiz, Sri Taklu Rajowar @
Sanjay Rajowar, Sri Kartik Bhumiz and Sri Deba Rajowar @ Debeswar Rajowar, were shouting
and demanding that the doctor Sir should be thrashed and assaulted; that accused persons
namely, Sri Sanjay Rajowar, Son of Late Babu Rajowar, Sri Ratul Rajowar and Sri Rinku Majhi
breaking the glass panes of doors and windows by giving blows and in the process, all of
them sustained cut injuries in their hands and that accused Sri Suresh Rajowar giving blows
to Dr. Deben Dutta and also that accused Sri Siba Mahali kicked doctor Sir from his front
Page No.# 78/114
side”. This witness however, in his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. did not state
before him that “he saw accused Sri Suresh Rajowar pushing & pulling the Welfare Officer;
that he, Deputy Manager and Sri Manoj Gogoi, Bor Manager, tried to restrain the persons
from thrashing/assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta Sir but they were not successful as they did not
listen tous; that accused persons namely, Sri Bablu Rajowar, Sri Sivcharan Mahali and Sri
Rahul Rajowar were pulling & pushing the police personnel “.
Witness Sri Gopal Bora [PW-36] during his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.
stated before him that “the accused Sri Sanjay Rajowar, Son of Late Babu Rajowar, by
breaking the glass panes of windows and then with a broken piece of window glass pierced
into the right thigh of Dr. Deben Dutta Sir”.
This witness, however, during his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. did not state
before him that “accused Sri Rahul Rajowar pushed the police personnel and that accused
Bijit Mahali @ Sibawas pushed out of the doctor’s chamber by the police “.
Witness Sri Rupam Saikia [PW-37] during his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C.
stated before him that ” on the date of incident hearing shouts from the garden he went to
the place of incident but he did not state that he went to the garden to bring ration “. This
witness, however, during his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. did not state before him
that “when he arrived in the garden hospital outside he saw gathering of about 400/500
persons; that he entered inside the garden hospital; that 15/20 persons were present at the
doctor’s chamber at the time of incident; that Sri Jintu Majhi, Sri Rahimsh Bhumij, Sri
Kulaguti Rajowar, Sri Bapai Rajowar were present but they came out when others started
assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta”.
He had stated that Sri Paban Garh[PW-38] during his statement under section 161
Cr.P.C stated before him that ” accused namely , Dipak Rajowas, Sri Kishore Bhumij, Sri
Misilal Majhi@ Jabra Majhi, Sri Ramesh Bhumji, Sanjay Rajowas@ Taklu were instigating
others to assault Dr. Deben Dutta”.
He admitted that the witness did not state before him the name of accused Sri Siba
Rajowar @ Bijit.
Page No.# 79/114
Sri Pabitra SahuPW-41 during his statement under section 161 Cr.P.Cl ” accused
namely, Sri Arjun Majhi and Sri Rahimsh Bhumij shouted and instigated the people present
there to assault the doctor
He admitted the suggestion that this witness did not state before him that “Arjun Majhi
was shouting to assult the doctor”.
He had stated that Sri Utpal Khound PW-42 during his statement under section 161
Cr.P.C stated before him that “he had submitted one certificate in lieu of different C.D’s of
the video footage of the incident”.
He had stated that regarding Samra Majhi’s death one U.D. case was registered but
he does not remember the number or the case diary.
Re- examination of PW-54
67. On re-examination, he had deposed to the effect that he produced 02 [two]
certificates as per provision of Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act that day.
Exhibit-88 are the photographs (20 numbers) captured at the place of occurrence,
i.e., Teok Tea Estate Hospital, on 31.08.2019, and the same was generated from his
mobile hand set Nos. 9706738971 & 7002811211. Exhibit-88 (1) as his signatures.
Exhibit-89 are (1) the screen shot photographs (72 nos.) taken from the videos
provided by witnesses Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound and Sri Riju Kumar Saikia during the course
of investigation in the process of identification of the involved accused persons. The
screen shots were taken on 15.09.2019 which were annexed as Annexure-331 to 402 in
the original case diary. (2) Photographs (20 nos.) captured at the place of occurrence, i.e.,
Teok Tea Estate Hospital on 31.08.2019 which were generated from the computer set
which was under his control at the time of procuring photo-prints of the same. Exhibit-89
(1) is his signature.
Cross examination was declined by the learned defense counsel.
Page No.# 80/114
Submissions of the learned counsels
68. Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the appellant Sanjoy Rajowar in Crl.Appeal No.
54/2021 led this Court to the evidence deposed by the following witnesses to bring home the
submission that there was absence of pre meditation on the part of the appellant and that
the conviction under 302 IPC is liable to be set aside since the involvement of the appellant in
the death of Dr. Deben Dutta and that the action of the appellant and his involvement in the
death of Dr. Deben Dutta shows that it would come under the ambit of the exceptions under
Section 300 IPC since there was no pre meditation on the part of the appellant to cause the
death of the Doctor.
69. The learned counsel has led this Court submitted that during the course of trial the
prosecution examined 56(Fifty Six) prosecution witnesses. He submitted that so far as Crl.
Appeal No.54/2021 (Sanjay Rajowar-Vs.-The State of Assam & Anr.) is concerned the
deposition of the prosecution witnesses relied on by the appellants are as follows :
70. PW-3- (Manoj Gogoi) is a Senior Manager of Teok Tea Estate and also the Informant of
the case although named 12 persons in his examination in chief but did not mention the
name of the appellant Sanjoy Rajowar (Crl.Apl. No.54/2021). He further deposed that he
could learn about the names of the accused persons he has named through video footage
and from office staff including Prakash Rajowar and Jibon Kurmi (PW-52) but Prakash
Rajowar was not examined. In his cross examination this witness has stated that he has seen
clearly the appellant Sanjoy Rajowar along with three other accused persons assaulting the
Doctor. During his cross examination this witness has clearly stated that when he reached the
Garden Hospital, Doctor had already sustained injury and was not in a state to reply properly.
The statement contradicts the statement of PW-1 to the affect that the deceased was in
subconscious state and he identified me and told the last statement “so far I know that my
femoral artery has been cut, called the Ambulance or I will die”. Be it stated that being the
informant PW-3 lodged the ejahar at around 10:10 PM on the date of occurrence itself
naming 30 persons as accused who assaulted the deceased. The ejahar was lodged about 6
hours after the incident but still it was not mentioned in the ejahar that the fatal blow which
Page No.# 81/114
the deceased received was caused by the appellant.
71. P.W.9-(Sri Khanindra Nath) is a Sub-Inspector of police and at the relevant point of
time was posted at Teok Police station. In his deposition before the learned trial court this PW
has stated that accused Sanjoy Rajowar along with two other accused persons assaulting Dr.
Deben Dutta by giving fist blows, kicks etc and further deposed that accused Sanjoy Rajowar
attempted to assault him.
In his cross examination, PW 9 specifically admitted that in his 161 statement he had
not stated before the Investigating Officer of the case about assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta by
Sanjoy Rajowar and also not stated that Sanjoy Rajowar attempted to assault him.
72. P.W.10- (Debasish Boruah) is a Constable of Teok Police station. According to him he
went inside the Doctor’s Room and there he saw Dr. Deben Dutta was sitting and he was
being assaulted by about 30/40 miscrents. The PW-10 further deposed before the Hon’ble
trial court that he saw Sanjoy Rajowar along with 7 other accused persons assaulting Dr.
Deben Dutta and Sanjoy Rajowar was more aggressive than the other accused person and
even after he was chased out, he again made his way and assaulted Dr. Deben Dutta as well
as broke doors and windows including glass panes.
In his cross examination, PW 10 specifically admitted that in his 161 statement he has
not stated before the Investigating Officer of the case about these facts. He has stated that
the room where the doctor was sitting was approximately 15×15 feet in size and inside the
said room, at the relevant point of time there were six police personnel, some officials of tea
garden etc. were present. It creates reasonable doubt whether in a room of size 15×15 feet
30/40 miscreants along with so many of police personnel and official staff can accommodate
as because besides these persons there were 2 tables, chairs and a bed for examination of
patients.
73. P.W.12- (Nareswar Robidas) is the chowkidar of Teok T.E Garden Hospital. In his
deposition before the Learned Trial Court has stated that as soon as the garden manager
arrived at the tea garden hospital and went inside the chamber of Dr.Deben Dutta, then all
Page No.# 82/114
the members of the crowd including accused Manoj Majhi rushed inside the chamber of
Dr.Deben Dutta and from outside he could hear hue and cry thereafter Immediately. PW-12
named Sanjay Rajowar alongwith 9 Ors, going inside the chamber of Dr. Deben Dutta.
In his cross examination PW-12 specifically admitted while his statement was recorded
by police he did not named any other persons except one Mukul Rajowar and Manoj Majhi.
However, Mukul Rajowar was not examined.
74. P.W.17-(Mridul Borah)-is the Home Guard of Teok P.S. and in his deposition before the
trial court he has stated that accused Sanjay Rajowar and one Bolin Rajowar prevented him
from taking Dr.Deben Dutta out of his chamber to the police vehicle.
In his cross examination, PW-17 specifically admitted that he did not named these
persons before police and even failed to recognize them in court. Moreover, in his cross
examination he heard the names of Sanjay and Bolin from others when they prevented him
from taking Dr.Deben Dutta to the police vehicle.
75. P.W.28-(Muktajyoti Boruah) is the Asstt. Manager of Teok Tea Estate. In his deposition
before the trial court he has deposed that when he went inside the doctor’s chamber he saw
30-40 persons present inside the room surrounding Dr. Deben Dutta and Sri Manoj Gogoi
(PW-3). In his deposition he further stated that suddenly more people came inside the
doctor’s chamber and they alongwith the 30-40 persons already present inside the chamber
started assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta by pushing away Sri Manoj Gogoi. He further deposed that
he had drafted the ejahar and named 30 persons in the ejahar as accused. He has deposed
that accused persons (32 nos.) who are present in the court today, all of them were present
at the time of incident and he recognized in the court Sri Sanjay Rajowar alongwith 6 ors. and
out of them he saw Sanjay Rajowar and 4 other accused persons assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta.
In his examination in chief he could collected the names with the help of few staffs namely
Sri Prakash Rajowar, Jiban Kurmi, Welfare Officer and dresser Sri Subhash Rajowar as well as
other staffs but Jibon Kurmi (PW-52) had deposed that he had seen the accused standing
trial now in the varanda of the T.E Hospital and also inside the hospital campus and he had
Page No.# 83/114
not seen witnessed the incident of assault.
In his cross examination, P.W-28 specifically admitted that he did not named the
accused persons before police about assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta by these accused persons
specifically but have stated that about assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta by the persons present
inside the Doctor’s chamber.
76. P.W.44-Tezu (ST) Assembly Constituency (Duleswar Majhi) is the temporary Mohourer
of Teok Tea Estate. He had deposed before the learned trial court that he witnessed after
entering into the compound of the hospital that around 30-40 persons were assaulting the
doctor who was sitting in his chair. Besides other he had also deposed that on the next day of
occurrence police recorded his statement by calling him to the police station and showed
some video footage of the incident and then he identified the accused persons whom he
named in the court. However, this statement is in contradiction with the statement I.O who
said that on 13-9-2019 the I.O got information that one Sri Duleswar Majhi is also eye
witness of the case and he could identify the accused person. He named Sanjay Rajowar and
19 ors. as the persons who had assaulted the doctor with fist and blows. He also stated that
Sri Sanjoy Rajowar and some other accused persons were scuffling with the police personnel
and also seen Sanjoy Rajowar breaking the window glasses and window panes. He had
identified accused persons in video footage played in the court and from photographs taken
out by PW-56 (Material Exhibit-53 to 126).
In his cross examination he has specifically admitted that it is a fact that all the 20
persons alongwith Sanjay Rajowar whom he named in his examination-in chief have not
assaulted the doctor.
77. P.W-52-(Jiban Kurml) is the Welfare Officer, Teok Tea Estate. In his deposition before
court he had stated that on 31-08-2019 at 4 P.M one Sri Debajyoti Baruah informed him over
telephone that some of the labourers assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta at Teok Tea Estate Hospital.
Immediately he rushed towards the hospital in his scooty and on reaching hospital he went
inside the hospital campus and has found many people in the varanda of the hospital and
Page No.# 84/114
also in the chamber of Dr. Deben Dutta. While he tried to enter in to the hospital at that time
someone pushed him in the varanda and he fell in the ground. Then he saw Sri Monoj Gogol,
Sr. Manager and the Asstt. Manager Sri Mukta Jyoti Baruah entering into the hospital campus
there were about 100-150 people inside the hospital and the varanda then he returned back
to his official quarter in his Scooty and from there he went Teok FRU for medical treatment.
He had also deposed that why he reached the varanda of Teok T.E Hospital at that time some
people were assaulting the doctor at that relevant point of time but he had not seen the
persons who had assaulted the doctor. He further deposed that he had seen the accused
standing trial now in the varanda of the Teok T.E hospital and also inside the hospital
compound.
The statement of the PW-52 contradicts with PW-28 who according to him drafted the
ejahar taking the names from PW-52 and others. Be it stated that there were details of 30
accused persons in the ejahar.
78. P.W.48-(Tarun Ch. Sonowal) is the Jailor. In his deposition he has stated that on 10-9-
2019, while he was working as Asstt. Jailor, Central Jail, Jorhat, O.C, Teok P.S went to jail for
taking finger prints of Sanjoy Rajowar.
In his cross examination, he has stated that at the time of taking finger prints of
Sanjoy Rajowar no Judicial or Executive Magistrate or any independent witness was present.
Deposition of protected witnesses
79. P.W.32-(Sri Manoj Das) is a vegetable vendor. He has deposed before the court that on
hearing hue and cry inside the doctor’s chamber he went there and saw Dr.Deben Dutta was
being surrounded by about 60-70 persons in the chamber and they were shouting and saying
that Doctor Sir should be thrashed. In his deposition he has named 29 persons including
Sanjoy Rajowar. He has deposed that he has seen Sanjoy Rajowar alongwith 2 ors. breaking
the glass panes of doors and windows by giving blows and in the process all of them
sustained cut injury in their hands.
Page No.# 85/114
In his cross examination he has admitted that he has not stated before the police as
well as in his 164 statement about presence of 60-70 persons in the doctor’s chamber. He has
also deposed in his cross examination that the persons and staffs whom he has named before
the court in his examination-in- chief, at the time of incident he could notice them only he
was witnessing the incident and large number of persons were present.
80. P.W-36-(Gopal Borah) is the employee of Teok Tea Estate. In his deposition before the
court he has stated that on the day of incident he entered into the doctor’s chamber and
found a group of about 40/50 persons and they started assaulting Dr. Deben Dutta and at
that time Deputy Manager and Bor Manager of Teok Tea garden was inside the room. He has
named all together 16 persons in his examination-in-chief. He has stated that he saw accused
Sanjay Rajowar, son of Late Babu Rajowar by baking the glass panes of windows and then
with a broken piece of window glass pierced in to right thigh of Deben Dutta Sir.
In his cross examination, he has stated that on the next day of incident he called to
police station and on next day he was taken to Jorhat Sadar P.S. In his cross examination he
has admitted that it is a fact that he has not stated before the police as well as before the
learned Magistrate that he witnessed 40- 50 persons in the doctor’s chamber. He has also
stated that when he went for the first time to doctor’s chamber, initially there were 4 police
personnel in the doctor’s chamber and also at the time of incident other than him Deputy
Manager and Bor-Manager were present and they asked 4 other persons to pacify the
members of the gathering which were inside the doctor’s chamber.
81. P.W-37-(Sri Rupam Saikia) is a private driver. He has deposed before the court on that
on that day he went to tea garden to bring reason and on the way he saw Samara Majhi
taken to Teok T.E Hospital by Sri Bablu Rajowar, Milon Rajowa, Dipak Rajowar and Hari Majhi
lifting him to the hospital. When he arrived outside the garden hospital he saw gathering of
400-500 persons. he has deposed that besides some other persons he saw accused Sanjay
rajowar after giving fist blows on the face of Dr. Deben Dutta went outside the chamber of
Dr.Deben Dutta and then he removed his shirt and tied it in his hand and thereafter he
broake the glass panes of the doors of the hospital and then with one piece of broken glass,
Page No.# 86/114
pierced the same in the left thigh of Dr. Deben Dutta.
In his cross examination, he has stated that on the next day of the incident, around 11
P.M police came to our house and first wanted to take my father for identifying the persons
whose names police had brought alongwith them. As at that time my father was not in a
position to walk due to the sikness, so I volunteered to go with the police. Of the names
which police had brought alongwith them at that time, I have named them today. PW-37 also
stated in his cross examination that police called him to the police station after 3-4 days again
and he was there for about 4-5 days and alongwith them Sri Pinku Majhi and Bhai were
there. In his cross examination PW-37 admitted that he did not state before police about
presence of 15/20 persons at the doctor’s chamber at the time of incident, however,
he stated before police that several persons were present in the doctor’s chamber.
82. P.W-38-(Paban Garh) is a factory worker. He deposed before the court that at around
3/3-30 PM he went to Tea Garden Hospital and when he reached there he has seen many
people gathering outside the garden hospital. He has seen accused Guludeb Majhi assaulting
the welfare officer of the tea garden. Thereafter he entered into the garden hospital and seen
some persons including Sanjay Rajowar assaulting Dr. Daben Dutta in his chamber by
administering fist and leg blow.
In his cross examination it was elicited that after two days of occurrence police lifted
him from his residence at night and kept him in the police station for about 7 days. Alongwith
him he named another 9 persons that police kept with him. He also stated that after 7 days
police got his statement recorded in court and thereafter police did not lift him from his
residence. He also stated that before his arrival at the doctor’s chamber the doctor got
injuries on his person and he does not know how the doctor got the injuries over his leg but
after his arrival he has seen the accused persons assaulting him. About 30/40 people were
present in the chamber of the doctor.
83. P.W-39-(Jiban Tanti) is a permanent worker of tea garden. So far as Sri Sanjay Rajowar
is concerned he deposed before the court that on the relevant date some of the accused
Page No.# 87/114
persons were seen breaking window panes and glasses of doors and windows of the garden
hospital and among them Sri Sanjoy Rajowar was also breaking window panes and glasses of
doors and windows. He also deposed before the court Sanjoy Rajowar and two others
threatened them no to adduce evidence in the court.
In his cross examination, he has stated that after 3 days of the occurrence police lifted
him from his residence at night and kept him at the police station for about 7 days. He was
kept 1 day at Teok P.S and rest of the days at Jorhat Sadar P.S. Alongwith him there were 7
persons of Teok Tea garden but he does not know their names. He has also stated that all the
7 persons gave their statements together.
84. P.W-40-(Raju Barik) is a daily wage earner. In his deposition did not name Sanjay
Rajowar before the court.
In his cross examination, he had stated that he had changed his name as told by the
officer in charge and he does not know the reason why his name has been changed. He has
also stated that at about 12 AM at night police came and taken him to the police station. At
the police station police showed him the accused persons in mobile phone and asked him
whether he is familiar with them or not and he told police that he is familiar with them. He
has also admitted in his cross examination that he has not stated before the police that he
has not seen as to who had assaulted the doctor in the chamber.
85. P.W-41-(Pabita Sahu) is a daily wage earner. In his deposition he has stated that some
accused persons assembled there, raised hue and cry and started beating the doctor in his
chamber. He stated before the court that he has seen Sanjoy Rajowar alongwith three others
breaking the window panes and tried to assault the doctor.
In his cross examination, he had stated that after one day of the incident police
recorded his statement and he has gone to the police station on 01-01- 2019 on his own
accord and he has told before the officer-in-charge about the accused who were entangled
into the occurrence. He has also state that he did not enter into the doctor’s chamber and
was in the varanda of the garden hospital and there were about 70-80 people in the varanda
Page No.# 88/114
of the hospital. He further stated that being afraid of arrest he went to the police station on
his own accord and deposed before the police about the occurrence.
Police also recorded the statement of two journalists who have according to them
recorded the video of the incident and handed over to police.
86. PW-42 Sri Utpal Jyoti Khound and PW-43 Sri Riju Kumar Salkia are the those two
journalists.
87. PW-42 had deposed in the court that about 50-60 persons entered in to the doctor’s
chamber. He has recorded video footage inside the doctor’s room also while the occurrence
was going on. The officer-in-charge, Teok P.S served him one notice to furnish the video
footage recorded by him alongwith his mobile phone alongwith one certificate. Then at the
police station he has handed over the mobile phone and the police extracted the data from a
mobile to a compact CD with the help of data cable and the data from his mobile were
transferred to 18 CD which he has submitted before police in the same form. He has
also given one certificate each against CDs/discs.
In his cross examination, PW-42 admitted that he did not state before police about
presence of 50-60 persons inside the doctor’s chamber and started altercation with the
doctor, causing mischief of the doctor and started manhandling with the doctor. In his cross
examination he has also stated that after 4-5 days of the incident he gave the video footage
to the police but he has forgotten the date on which the same was handed over to police. He
further stated that he had issued the certificates regarding different video footage of the
incident were drafted by police at the police station. He has received the notice on 14-09-
2019. He put his signature on the certificate which he have given regarding the video footage
C.D’s are also signed on the same date. He also stated that he did not depose falsely in
favour of the family members of the deceased Dr. Deben Dutta.
88. The learned counsel submitted that on the analysis of the evidence adduced by the
prosecution witness, the involvement of the accused persons is mentioned to the extent that
PW-1 stated that he had seen Manoj Majhi addressing 8/10 persons outside the chamber of
Page No.# 89/114
the doctor. He mentioned that he saw Kalanag Majhi, Ratul Rajowar, Kartik Bhumij and Sanjay
Majhi in the crowd. He saw accused No. 23, 22, 2 & 20 PWs seizure witness and he identified
the seized items. However, in the cross examination, he admitted that he did not mention the
name of the accused person. PW-2 had named Manoj Majhi accused No. 23 only because he
was the member of AATTSA.
89. The learned counsel for the appellant relied on the evidence adduced by PW-33, Dr.
Kanak Ch. Das who is the police Surgeon who conducted the P.M examination over the dead
body of Dr. Deben Dutta. During P.M examination the following injuries were observed:
Injury No. 1: Stab Injury of size 4cm X 1cm X muscle deep is present over the medial
aspect of right thigh, situated 13cm above the upper border of patella, 23cm below the
symphysis pubis & 5cm medial to mid thigh line, having clean cut margins & clotted blood are
found adherent at the wound margins which were resistant to washing with water. On
dissection it is found that, weapon passes through (Track of the injury) the skin,
subcutaneous tissue, vastus medialls, adductor longus & femoral artery partially cut &
separated.
Injury No. 2: Contusion of size 5cm X 4cm X soft tissue depth, is present over the right
side of face, just lateral to right eye. (Red in colour)Injury No. 3: Contusion of size 5cm. X 3cm X soft tissue depth, is present over the left
side of face, just lateral to left eye. (Red in colour)Injury No. 4: Scalp contusions of steel) 3cm X 2cm over forehead from Bon aver right
parietal region, III) 3cm X 2cm over fronto parietal region & le 3cm x 2 cm over the porieto-
occipital regions ore present. (All were red in colour Skull & vertebrae-healthy.
Injury No. 5: Contusion of size 6cmX5cm is present on front of the chest, upper part,
left side & underneath-3rd & 4th ribs found fractured with surrounding soft tissue contusion.
There were all together 5 injuries found by the doctor during P.M. Injury No.1 is stab
Page No.# 90/114injury. Injury No.2, 3 & 4 contusion in different places and Injury No.5 also contusion on front
of the chest, upper part left side and underneath 2 ribs fracture. However, it was not stated in
the opinion that Injury No.1 can be solely responsible for death. The prosecution side by re-
examining the doctor tried to establish that the injury No.1 can be solely responsible for
death but failed to prove the same.
90. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that there was a violation of
the provisions of Witness Protection Scheme by stating that The Investigating Officer in his
deposition had clearly mentioned that on the next day he had visited the place of occurrence,
examined the witnesses as per provision of section 161 of Cr. P.C. arrested the accused
persons and thereafter forwarded them to the court. On visiting the place of occurrence on
the next day the I/O found 7 (Seven) witnesses who had witnessed the occurrence but he did
not record their statements as they expressed apprehension/threat to their lives. The I/O had
recorded the statement of these 7 (seven) witnesses under the Witness Protection Scheme
on 05/09/2019 and thereafter made a prayer before the court for protection of some of
witnesses under Witness Protection Scheme and the Hon’ble Court passes an Interim order to
conceal the identity of the said witnesses under the Witness Protection Scheme. The I/O
further deposed that on 06/09/2019, the 7 (seven) witnesses under the Witness Protection
Scheme were produced before the learned court and on 07.09.2019 the Hon’ble Court
recorded the statement of the aforesaid witnesses as per provision of Section 164 of Cr. P.C.
However it is clear from his deposition that at no point of time the learned Magistrate called
for threat perception report which should be the basis for declaring a witness as
protected one.
91. He submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court again in a Judgment rendered in the case
of Mahendra Chawla and Others -Versus- Union Of India and Others reported in
(2019)14 SCC 615 (Para-35, 36) declared the said Scheme to be law under Article 141 and
142 of the Constitution of India. Therefore the Investigating Agency is mandatorily required
to follow the procedure laid down in the sald Scheme. Otherwise the entire procedure will
become nonest in the eye of law. This procedure laid down in the Scheme is a safeguard so
Page No.# 91/114
that no accused got prejudiced in any manner while cross examining the witness. A reading
of the Scheme would go to show that only when there is a clear threat upon the witness, the
investigating officer can resort to the provision of the Scheme of 2018. The defence always
faces difficulty in questioning the credibility of the witness as their antecedents are not known
to the accused. The credibility can be questioned only when antecedents of a witness is
known. In the present case none of the protected witnesses except PW-41 had mentioned
about any threat received by them from many quarter. Rather, one protected witness clearly
stated before the court in his chief that he on his own went to the police station. Moreover
majority of the protected witnesses had also admitted that they were kept in Jorhat P.S for
about 7 days alongwith others whereafter their statements were recorded under Section 164
of Cr.P.C. These facts if we take together clearly lead us to believe that this witnesses are
tutored.
92. The learned counsel further submitted that the provisions of Section 65(B) of the
Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was not followed in the instant case when the video recordings of
the incident was used to identify the accused persons. He submitted that Section-65 (B) of
the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with the admissibility of electronic records. Section 65(B)
(4)(b) of the Act reads as follows:
“(b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic
record as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record was
produced by a computer;”
In the instant case from the 65(B) certificates issued by PW-42 and PW- 43 it becomes
crystal clear that in the whole process two devices were used for producing the Exhibits-35 to
52. However, 65(B) certificates issued by both the witnesses relates only to their mobiles,
which however were never seized.
The Clause-5 of the certificates very clearly mentioned that the videos were uploaded in
the CDs through a computer system. No 65(B) certificates in respect of the said computer
system has been Issued.
Page No.# 92/114
This assumes significant in view of the fact that both the witnesses has claimed in their
deposition that video footages were handed over to the police after 3-4 days of the incident
and that to at the police station itself (PW-43).
That means PW-43 & 44 are not the owners of the computer system. Whereas PW-56
(I/O) in his evidence has claimed that he had received the videos from PW-42 & 43 on 14-9-
2019. In view of these discrepancies the question of having proper certificates under
Sec.65(B) of the Indian Evidence Act assume significance.
Therefore the identification of the accused persons by PW-44 based on such video
footages which are not in terms of the law is required to be rejected in toto.
93. The learned counsel also stated the investigating officer in his deposition although
mention about collection of chance finger print, however, he did not describe the manner in
which collected the chance finger print. The chance finger print was collected on 31-8-2019
whereas it was collected by forensic experts on 11-9-2019. During this long period where
chance finger print kept was not disclosed by the 1.0 in his evidence. Moreover from the
deposition of the witnesses it is cleared that glasses were broken by different people.
Therefore it was incumbent upon the investigating agency to ensure elimination of
possibilities of the piece of glass containing finger prints of any other person. Failure on the
part of the investigating agency to ensure such compliance vitiates the report of the finger
print expert. None of the witnesses have mentioned that the accused No.1 and any other
used the piece of glass seized at Sl.No.1 of the Exhibit-1 to stab the doctor. In view of that it
is not understandable as how the I.O come to a conclusion that fringe print in the glass piece
seized at Sl.No.1 of the Exhibit-1 is belong to Sanjay Rajowar. In this regard reference can be
made to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Hari Om Alias Hero-Vs.-The State of
Uttar Pradesh reported in (2021) 4 SCC 345 (Para-32 and 34) and the decision of the Hon’ble
High Court of Karnataka in Thippeswamy @ Kunta Thippaga-Vs.-State by Challakere Police
reported in 2022 SCC OnLine Kar1650 (Para-22 and 26).
The learned counsel submitted that essentially the persecution has brought on record
Page No.# 93/114
four of witnesses viz- (1) Tea Garden’s officials, (2) Police, (3) Journalists and (4) Protected
witnesses. Out of these witness from the evidences of first, second and third set of witness it
becomes clear that these witnesses had not named most of the accused persons during their
statement recorded under Sec.161 of Cr.P.C. we have already discussed these improvements
in detail hereinabove. Although these three sets of witnesses were all along there virtually
from the onset of commotion, however, none of them have specifically mentioned about the
stabbing by Sanjay Rajowar, S/o-Babu Rajowar. Even the video footage captured by the PW-
42 and 43, did not disclose mass attack on the doctor. Except Material Exhibit-53 which shows
assault by accused Ajay Majhi and Material Exhibit-55 which shows assault on doctor by
accused Sri Siba Mahili@ Bijit Mahili and Sri Dipak Rajowar and breaking of window glasses
by the accused Sanjay Rajowar, the rest of the photographs only shows the rest of presence
of the accused persons in the place of occurrence. The video footage again as has been
showed cannot be relied on for (a) failure to produce the mobile phones, (b) fallure to
provide certificate under Section 65(B) of the Indian Evidence Act in respect of the computer
system used for uploading the video in CD and (c) for serious contradictions in the
statements of PW-42(Utpal Jyoti Khound), PW-43(Rlju Kumar Saikia), PW-44 (Duleswar
Majhi) and PW-56 (1.0) regarding the date of handing over of the videos.
94. The learned counsel further submitted that the evidence of crucial witnesses like PW-
42, PW-43, PW-44 on the face of it cannot be relied on for improvement and inherent
contradictions in their versions.
PW-52-Jiban Kurmi, Welfare Officer of the Tea Estate also present there and
specifically stated that he seen all the accused persons in the varanda of the hospital and
inside the hospital campus.
PW-3 & PW-28 did not name the accused persons during their 161 statement.
PW-9, PW-10, PW-11 and PW-17-Police personals inspite of being present in the place
of occurrence before entry of protected witnesses did not name any one before police.
Protected witnesses (PW-32 and 36-41)
Page No.# 94/114
95. The learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that the prosecution case in
fact hinge on the evidences of these witnesses and learned court below put heavy reliance on
their statements. However, the evidence of protected witnesses cannot be considered as
trustworthy and decisive for following reason:
A. The manner of making them protected witness i.e. violation of the Witness
Protection Scheme, 2018.
B. Admittedly these witnesses were kept under the police custody prior to recording
their statements before the learned Magistrate u/s-164 Cr.P.C.
C. All the protected witness i.e. Protected Witness No. 32 named 29 persons, Protected
Witness No. 36 named 16 persons, Protected Witness No.37 named 20 persons, Protected
Witness No.38 named 25 persons, Protected Witness No.39 named 21 persons, Protected
Witness No.40 named 9 persons and Protected Witness No.41 named 17 accused persons as
the assaulters. However, the ocular evidence of these witnesses does not match with the
medical evidence which shows only 5 injuries, going by the statement of these witnesses the
injury ought to have been far more then what medical evidence revealed.
D. The PW-36 & PW-37 are the eye witness to assault by Sanjay Rajowar. However,
according to PW-36 the assault was on right thigh and according to PW-37 it was on left
thigh. There is a serious dent on their evidence.
E. The description of the assault by the witnesses are vivid. and photographs which
creates doubts about the veracity and genuineness of their evidence.
Discrepancies narrated herein above create serious holes on the prosecution story
leading to a conclusion that the prosecution fails to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.
It was also further submitted by the learned counsel that even assuming but not
admitting the prosecution story to be proved then also I is not a case under Sec.302 IPC.
Absence of premeditation and intent will bring it within the ambit of exceptions mentioned
Page No.# 95/114under Sec.300 IPC.
Premeditation is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary as “Conscious consideration and
planning that precedes some act (such as committing a crime)”.
96. The learned counsel thus submitted in the case in hand the prosecution has failed to
bring any material to show prior planning by the accused persons. The people gathered
spontaneously at the place of occurrence in connection with the death of a person namely
Samara Majhji and anger was triggered by the absence of the doctor and the nurse in the
hospital at 3 PM which is the office hour. Had there people come with any other weapon then
only the question of premeditated attack will come.
On the other hand nature of Injuries also a determining factor to see whether intention
to kill was there or not. Out of 5 injuries, 4 injuries are not fatal according to the learned trial
Judge also. So far as the injury No.1 is concerned which lead to cutting of femoral artery, no
person without specialized knowledge can have an idea that the attack in thigh can lead to
cutting of femoral artery and this can be fatal. From absence of such knowledge and lack of
early planning a conclusion can be safely drawn that the present case will fall under one of
the exception to the Section 300 IPC.
It is also a vital aspect of the case that PW-28 who initially drafted the ejahar has
mentioned that he has gathered the names of the persons in the mob with the help of one
Prakash Rajkowar, Subhash Rajowar and Jiban Kurmi, but Prakash Rajowar was not
examined. On the other hand PW-44 in his evidence had deposed before the court that the
accused Siba Mahili@ Bijit Mahili and Sri Dipak Rajowar were assaulting the doctor and PW-3
and one Sri Mukul Rajowar were trying to save the doctor but again Mukul Rajowar is not
examined by the prosecution. Moreover that most of the witnesses more particularly the
protected witnesses had deposed that they had seen about 30-40 persons inside the doctors
chamber. PW-44 had stated about 50-60 persons inside the doctors chamber which is a room
of size around 15ft.X15ft. There were 2 tables, shares and other essential tools/articles inside
the said room which creates room of doubt about the number of persons actually present
Page No.# 96/114
inside the chamber.
97. The learned counsel relied on the following authorties to substantiate his submissions:-
(i) Swamy Shraddananda alias Murali Manohar Mishra Vs. State
of Karnataka, reported in (2008) 13 SCC 767
(ii) Hari Om alias Hero Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh , reported in
(2021) 4 SCC 345
(iii) State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Udham & Ors., reported in (2019)
10 SCC 300
(iv) State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Raghuvir Singh in Criminal Appeal
No. 1588 of 2015
(v) Tomaso Bruno & Anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, reported in
(2015) 7 SCC 178
(vi) 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1246, In Re : Framing Guidelines
Regarding Potential Mitigating Circumstances to be considered
while imposing Death Sentences in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 1
of 2022 decided on September 19, 2022
(vii) Anvar P.V. Vs. P.K. Basheer & Ors., reported in (2014) 10 SCC
473
98. Ms. S. Jahan, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, on the other hand submitted that on the
analysis of the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, it is seen that:-
PW No. 1 – Sri. Soumen Kundu, Assistant Manager of the Garden. He saw
Manoj Majhi chanting that the doctor should have been removed long back. He identified (a)
Kalanag Majhi, (b) Ratul Rajowar @ Hasim, (c) Kartik Bhumiz, (d) Sanju Majhi, obstructing
the Ambulance.
Page No.# 97/114
In his cross examination, he stated he did not state before police that the four accused
persons obstructed the ambulance but he said, they banged the door of the ambulance.
99. PW No. 3 -Sri. Manoj Gogoi, he was the informant. In his examination in chief,
he stated that he knows the accused persons by their faces but did not know their names and
that from his Assistants, he gathered the names. He recognized the following accused
persons in the dock. (a) Ajay Majhi @ Tutu, (b) Manoj Majhi, (c) Anil Majhi, (d) Dipak
Rajowar, (e) Debeswar Rajowar @ Deba, (f) Suresh Rajowar, (g) Sanjib Rajowar, (h) Sanjay
Rajowar, (i) Rinku Majhi, (j) Bolin Rajowar and (k)Sanju Majhi.
In his cross examination, he re-iterated that he saw clearly accused (a) Sanjay
Rajowar, (b) Sanjib Rajowar, (c) Suresh Rajowar, (d) Arun Majhi to have assaulted the doctor.
There are no contradictions in his statement as far as naming the assailants are concerned.
100. PW No. 9 – Sri. Khanindra Nath, he was the Sub-Inspector of Teok Police
Station – The OC directed him to go to the place of occurrence and as such, he along with
two constables and a mobile patrolling unit reached the place of occurrence and saw a huge
gathering of 200/250 people outside the hospital and saw 30/40 people inside the chamber
assaulting the doctor. These people forced the police personnel to go out of the chamber and
also obstructed them from taking the injured doctor out for treatment, attracting Section 186
IPC. The doctor was bleeding profusely and that the constable, Kamal Das tried to stop the
bleeding by tying the wound with a saline pipe being unable to get any cloth. This witness
further stated that people gathered outside, were shouting that they would kill the
Doctor, and showing their common object. He also stated that on arrival of more police force,
they took out the Doctor and by a police vehicle took him to Jorhat Medical Hospital.
This witness named (a) Sanjay Rajowar, (b) Manoj Majhi, (c) Rinku Bagti to have
assaulted the Doctor. He also said that Sanjay Rajowar assaulted him too. He further
identified in the dock the accused (a) Ajay Majhi, (b) Sanjib Rajowar, (c) Manoj Majhi, (d)
Sanjay Rajowar, (e) Kalanag Majhi to have assaulted the Doctor with fist blows and kicks.
In his cross examination although there appears few contradictions viz. Sanjay Rajowar
Page No.# 98/114
attacking him, Constable trying to stop bleeding, outside people shouting to kill the doctor,
accused persons not allowing him to take the doctor out, were at best are omissions
101. PW No. 10 – Sri. Debabish Baruah, the constable of Teok Police Station. He
accompanied PW No. 9 and reached the place of occurrence. He identified in the dock, the
accused persons (a) Sibcharan Mahali @ Batu, (b) Upendra Bhumij @ Kishore Bhumiz, (c)
Siba Mahali, (d) Anil Majhi, (e) Kalanag Majhi, (f) Rahul Rajowar, (g) Ratul Rajowar @ Hasim,
(h) Sanjay Rajowar, assaulting the Doctor. He further stated that Sanjay Rajowar was more
aggressive and that even after he was chased out, he came back and assaulted the doctor
and broke the window panes. This witness also stated that people gathered outside shouted
that they would kill the doctor and that with much efforts and with additional forces, they
took out the doctor, took him to the hospital where he was declared as dead. The
contradiction that outside people shouting that they would kill the doctor is an omission.
102. PW No. 11 – Shri. Ghanakanta Mili, the constable who too accompanied PW No.
9 and 10 to the place of occurrence. He stated that upon reaching, when they tried to rescue
the doctor, the crowd tried to assault them too (Section 186 IPC). He identified in the dock,
the accused persons, (a) Bijay Rajowar, (b) Manoj Majhi, (c) Rinku Majhi assaulting the
doctor and that Rinku Majhi attacked him too. Again the contradiction viz. attacking on him is
an omission.
103. PW No. 12 – Nareswar Robidas, the chowkidaar of Teok Garden Hospital. He
stated that when patient Samra Majhi was brought to the hospital, the dresser was there who
immediately called the Nurse and that after 5 minutes, the Nurse came and after 10/15
minutes, the doctor came. He further stated that when Doctor came, 6/7 persons, who
accompanied the patient questioned the doctor as to why he came late and raised hue and
cry and that the doctor examined the patient and found him dead. He thereafter stated that
Manoj Majhi, AATTSA member arrived there and he took the Doctor to his chair and by
making him sit there told him not to go anywhere and to call the Garden Manager. Being
scared, this witness bolted the door of the chamber from inside but due to incessant banging
of the door by the crowd from outside, he opened it. A crowd of 30/40 people came inside
Page No.# 99/114
and assaulted the doctor and him too and told him not to interfere and as such he came out
and saw Manoj Majhi there waiting for Garden Manager and when the Manager came, Manoj
Majhi went inside the room with the Manager.
This witness identified accused persons, (a) Sanjay Rajowar, (b) Sanjib Rajowar, (c)
Suresh Rajowar, (d) Ajay Majhi, (e) Debeswar Rajowar S/O Late Samlal Rajowar, (f) Arjun
Majhi, (g) Dipak Rajowar, (h) Hari Majhi, (i) Rinku Majhi, (j) Manoj Majhi going inside the
room of the Doctor. He also stated that the 108 Ambulance was chased away and that with
additional police force, they could take out the doctor from the hospital.
In his cross examination, he stated that apart from Mukul Rajowar and Manoj Majhi,
he did not name others before police. He also stated that Arjun Majhi and Dipak Rajowar did
not do anything.
104. PW No. 17 – Sri. Mridul Borah, the homeguard at Teok Police Station. He on
the direction of the OC accompanied PW No. 14 along with BSF personnel to the place of
occurrence. He specifically stated that accused persons, (a) Sanjay Rajowar, (b) Bolin Rajowar
prevented him from taking the Doctor out of his room.
105. PW No. 25 – Subash Rajowar, the dresser. He stated that at 3 PM, Milan Rajowar
and Dipak Rajowar brought the patient, Samra Majhi to the hospital and that on seeing blood
oozing out, he immediately informed the Nurse which was at 3.20 PM and that the nurse
informed the Doctor over telephone who instructed her to check the blood pressure and
administer an injection. At around 3.55, the doctor reached the hospital and started treating
the patient. The doctor administered another injection and advised this witness to nebulize
the patient and when he was doing so as instructed, he heard hue and cry outside the
hospital and at that juncture, the Doctor told him to call the Garden Manager and that he
went to call him and unable to find him there, he leaving the information, came back to the
hospital but seeing the aggression in the hospital campus, he out of fear left for home.
106. PW No. 26 – Smti. Ranjula Hazarika Borah, the Nurse. She stated that while she
was preparing to depart for the hospital, PW No. 25 informed her about the patient and that
Page No.# 100/114
she immediately informed the doctor who advised her to administer the injection which she
did accordingly. She further stated that in the meantime, the doctor reached and he advised
for another injection and to nebulize the patient and while they were treating him, the
attendants of the patient abused the doctor and were preventing him from treating the
patient. She thereafter went to attend other patients and out of fear, she later left the
hospital.
107. PW No. 28 – Shri. Mukta Jyoti Baruah, the Assistant Manager of Teok Tea
Estate. He reached the place of occurrence at around 4.20 PM and saw 50/60 people outside
the hospital and when he went inside the doctor’s chamber, he saw 30/40 people surrounding
the doctor as well as the Manager and raising hue and cry. He tried to block the back door so
that more persons do not enter but more people entered and assaulted the doctor by pushing
away the Manager. He with the help of his staffs, Welfare Officer, Dresser collected the names
of the Assailants and had included them in the ejahar.
He identified in the dock the accused persons namely, (a) Sanjay Rajowar S/O late Babu
Rajowar, (b) Ajay Majhi, (c) Dipak Rajowar, (d) Suresh Rajowar, (e) Debeswar Rajowar S/O
Late Jogeswar Rajowar, assaulting the doctor. He also stated that he saw (a) Misilal Majhi and
(b) Sanju Majhi present in the chamber, raising hue and cry and saw others pushing, shoving,
raising hue and cry too. This witness further stated that the entire incident took place on the
instigation of Manoj Majhi, the AATTSA member.
The contradiction about collection of names is because he was not asked by the police
(page 94). Further contradiction that he did not name specifically will not be fatal.
108. PW No. 31 – Padma Kanta Saikia, the driver of 108 Ambulance. He stated that
the mob did not allow him to take the patient. They in fact closed the door and threatened
him to leave, attracting Section 186 IPC.
109. PW No. 32 – Manoj Das, a vegetable vendor. He on his way to a tea stall, saw
the huge gathering and as such, he entered the doctor’s chamber and saw 60/70 people
surrounding the doctor and shouting that the doctor should be thrashed.
Page No.# 101/114
He saw accused persons, (a) Hari Majhi, (b) Dipak Rajowar, (c) Milan Rajowar, (d) Arjun
Majhi, (e) Ramesh Bhumij, (f) Sanjay Rajowar @ Taklu, (g) Kartik Bhumiz, (h) Deba Rajowar
@ Debeswar Rajowar shouting that the doctor be thrashed. This witness further identified
accused persons, (a) Ajay Majhi, (b) Upendra Bhumiz, (c) Kalicharan Mahali, (d) Bijay
Rajowar, (e) Kalanag Majhi, (f) Siba Mahali, (g) Suresh Rajowar, (h) Sanjib Rajowar giving
blows to the doctor. This witness also identified accused persons, (a) Sanjay Rajowar S/O
Babu Rajowar, (b) Ratul Rajowar, (c) Rinku Majhi breaking the glass panes and getting
injured. He also identified (a) Bablu Rajowar, (b) Shivcharan Mahali, (c) Rahul Rajowar puling
and pushing police personnel. He further saw (a) Sanju Majhi, (b) Bolin Rajowar, (c) Gulu Dev
Majhi, (d) Arun Majhi, (e) Pritam Majhi, (f) Anil Majhi, (g) Rinku Bagti, (h) Misilal Majhi
inside the doctor’s chamber.
One contradiction was placed before him that Accused, Ramesh Bhumiz, Sanjay
Rajowar @ Taklu, Kartik Bhumiz and Debeswar Rajowar, were shouting that the doctor to be
thrashed.
110. PW No. 36 – Shri. Gopal Bora, a tea estate employee. He was on his way to
bring his ration and saw a big gathering in the hospital.
He saw Accused (a) Ajay Majhi throwing a table towards the doctor, giving his fist blows
as well as hitting with the pressure machine, (b) Sanjay Rajowar breaking glass panes and
piercing on the thigh of the doctor, (c) Rinku Majhi breaking glass and threatening, (d) Sanjib
Rajowar giving fist blows on the doctor and by showing and pressing on the injury, told the
doctor whether he got the lesson, (e) Bijoy Rajowar giving fist blows, (f) Batu Mahali
breaking glass panes & pushing the police personnel, (g) Kalanag Majhi giving fist blows, (h)
Rahul Rajowar giving fist blows, (i) Kartik Bhumiz shouting loudly and instigating others, (j)
Kalicharan Mahali attempting to assault the doctor, (k) Bijit Mahali kicking on the chest of the
doctor, (1) Bablu Rajowar chasing away 108 ambulance.
Few contradictions placed do not go to the root of the case.
Page No.# 102/114
111. PW No. 37 – Sri. Rupam Saikia, a driver by profession. He on his way to bring
ration saw the incident. He saw saline and oxygen been administered on the patient but at
the same time, he heard the attendants saying that the patient had already died.
He saw (a) Ajay Majhi, (b) Sanjib Rajowar, (c) Suresh Rajowar, (d) Kalanag Majhi,
giving fist blows, (e) Sanjay Rajowar giving fist blows who further by removing his shirt and
tying on his hand broke glass panes and pierced it on the thigh of the doctor, (f) Siba Mahali
kicking on the chest of the doctor, (g) Kalicharan Mahali giving fist blows, (h) Batu Mahali
breaking glass panes, (i) Ratul Rajowar breaking glass panes, (j) Rahul Rajowar threatening
police, (k) Rinku Majhi breaking glass panes, (1) Toklu Rajowar breaking the Boards and
banners, (m) Bablu Rajowar chasing 108 ambulance. Further he heard (a) Dipak Rajowar,
(b) Milan Rajowar, (c) Kartik Bhumiz shouting and instigating.
The contradictions placed again do not go to the root of the case.
112. PW No. 38 – Sri. Paban Garh, a factory worker. He reached the place of
occurrence little late since by then the doctor already had injuries on his leg.
He saw accused (a) Bablu Rajowar, (b) Milan Rajowar, (c) Ajay Majhi @ Tutu, (d) Ratul
Rajowar, (e) Rahul Rajowar, (f) Siba Mahali @ Bijit, (g) Sanjay Rajowar, (h) Sanjib Rajowar, (i)
Kartik Bhumiz, (j) Bijor Rajowar, (k) Kalicharan Mahali, (1) Kalanag Majhi, (m) Suresh Rajowar
giving fist blows on the doctor. He also saw (a) Dipal Rajowar, (b) Kishore Bhumiz, (c) Misilal
Majhi @ Jabra Majhi, (d) Ramesh Bhumiz, (e) Sanjay Rajowar @ Taklu assaulting the doctor.
He further saw (a) Arun Majhi, (b) Hari Majhi, (c) Rinku Majhi standing near the place of
occurrence. He also saw (a) Kalanag Majhi, (b) Sanjay Rajowar, (c) Siba Mahali obstructing
the police.
113. PW No. 39 – Sriu. Jiban Tati, a permanent Worker. He on his way home saw the
incident.
He saw (a) Ajay Majhi, (b) Bijit Mahali, (c) Bijoy Rajowar, (d) Sanjib Rajowar assaulting
the doctor and (e) Rinku Majhi creating hue and cry. He identified in the dock, (a) Sanjay
Rajowar, (b) Sanjay Rajowar @ Toklu, (c) Ratul Rajowar, (d) Bablu Rajowar breaking window
panes, (e) Rahul Rajowar chasing police, (f) Kalicharan Mahali assaulting the doctor, (g) Ajay
Majhi @ Tutu, (h) Sanjay Rajowar, (i) Bijay Rajowar threatening the witnesses not to depose.
Few contradictions were placed viz., Ajay Majhi, Bijit Majhi, Bijay Rajowar and Sanjib
Rajowar assaulting the doctor. Also Rahul Rajowar chasing police.
114. PW No. 40 – Sri. Raju Barik, a daily wage earner. He hear hue and cry and
reached the place of occurrence.
He saw (a) Kalicharan Mahali, (b) Sanjib Rajowar, (c) Sanjay Rajowar Toklu, (d) Sanjay
Page No.# 103/114
Rajowar @ Siba entering doctor’s chamber by breaking open the door. He also saw (a) Sanjib
Rajowar kicking the doctor on his chest, (b) Rinku Majhi, (c) Dipak Rajowar, (d) Debeswar
Rajowar shouting to assault the doctor, (e) Bablu Rajowar preventing the ambulance to take
the doctor.
115. PW No. 41 – Sri. Pabitra Sahu, a daily wage earner. On his way home, he saw
the incident.
He identified (a) Ajay Majhi, (b) Kalanag Majhi, (c) Bijay Rajowar, (d) Sanjib Rajowar,
(e) Suresh Rajowar, (f) Siba Mahali, (g) Kalicharan Mahali assaulting the doctor. He also saw
(a) Rinku Majhi, (b) Ratul Rajowar, (c) Sanjay Rajowar breaking window panes and trying to
assault the doctor. He further saw (a) Rahul Rajowar, (b) Sanjay Rajowar @ Taklu, (c)
Sivcharan Mahali preventing police. He saw (a) Arjun Majhi, (b) Ramesh Bhumiz shouting and
instigating people present there to assault the doctor, (c) Bablu Rajowar preventing 108
ambulance to enter, (d) Arjun Majhi shouting to assault the doctor.
116. PW No. 42 – Sri. Utpal Jyoti Khound, the reporter. He on being informed by his
colleague went to the place of occurrence. He recorded the video of the occurrence. When he
entered the doctor’s chamber, the doctor was alone who requested this witness to stay with
him. He saw the entire incident and that he tried to stop the bleeding from the thigh of the
doctor by tying the injured part with saline pipe. The OC of the police station served him a
notice to furnish the video footage to which he handed over his mobile phone and the police
extracted the data to 18 numbers of compact CDs by a data cable. He also submitted 18
numbers of certificates required under Section 65B of the Evidence Act. (Ext. 35 to 52).
In his cross examination, he said after 4 / 5 days, he gave the video footage to police.
Further he denied that he did not give the original footage to police which was saved in his
inbuilt memory.
117. PW No. 43 – Sri. Riju Kumar Saikia, A reporter. He received information from PW
No. 42 and reached the place of occurrence. He too recorded the video footage of the
incident in his mobile phone and on being asked by the police, he handed over his mobile to
police who extracted the data and transferred it to two numbers of compact CDs. This
witness also gave two certificates required under Section 65B of the Evidence Act. (Ext. 53
and 54).
In his cross examination, he said that he gave the video footage to police after 2/3
days. He also said that video footage was in the inbuilt memory.
Page No.# 104/114
118. PW No. 44 – Sri. Duleswar Majhi, a temporary Mohurer at Teok Tea Estate. He
witnessed (a) Sanjib Rajowar, (b) Sanjay Rajowar, (c) Sanjay Rajowar @ Taklu, (d) Bablu
Rajowar, (e) Bijay Rajowar, (f) Suresh Rajowar, (g) Kartik Bhumiz, (h) Rahul Rajowar, (i)
kalanag Majhi, (j) Sivcharan Mahali, (k) Kalicharan Mahali, (1) Siba Mahali, (m) Ajay Majhi,
(n) Ratul Rajowar, (0) Rameswar Bhumiz, (p) Rinku Majhi, (q) Milan Rajowar, R dipak
Rajowar, (s) Rinku Bagti, (t) Bolin Rajowar assaulting the doctor with fist and blows. He also
saw (a) Bablu Rajowar, (b) Milan Rajowar chasing 108 ambulance. (page 156). This witness
was shown a video footage and he identified all the assailants there. (page 157). He also
identified (a) Sanjay Rajowar, (b) Rinku Majhi, (c) Suresh Rajowar, (d) Ramesawr Bhumiz, (e)
Bablu Rajowar, (f) Kalanag Majhi, (g) Sanjib Rajowar, (h) Sanjib Rajowar, (i) Debeswar
Rajowar, (j) Kartik Bhumiz, (k) Rahul Rajowar, (1) Shivcharan Mahali attacking police. Also
identified (a) Siba Mahali, (b) Dipak Rajowar assaulting doctor. Also identified Sanjay Rajowar
breaking glass panes.. This witness proved the photographs printed from video No. 1. (ext.
55 to 126).
In his cross examination, he said all 20 accused persons named by him, did not assault
the doctor and out of the exhibits mentioned, he recognized only Manoj Gogoi in Ext. 65, one
in Ext.67, Sanjay Rajowar in Ext. 71, Bablu Rajowar in Ext. 89, Suresh Rajowar in Ext. 101,
Misilal Majhi in Ext. 102, Ratul Rajowar in Ext. 103, Ajay Majhi in Ext. 105, Milan Rajowar in
Ext. 106, Hari Majhi in Ext. 107, Bablu Rajowar, Sanjib Rajowar, Sanjib Majhi in Ext. 111.
(page 165)
119. PW No. 45- Dr. Amrit Kumar Saikia, Joint Director of Health Services, Jorhat. He
replied to the letter addressed by the SI raising an issue as to whether the Teok Garden
Hospital was a Medicare Service Institution and as to whether the Doctor was a Medicare
Service Personnel by replying in the positive. (page – 169)
120. PW No. 47 – Sri. Arup Mahanta, the Junior Scientific Officer. He on examination of the
deceased’s blood with the blood stains found on the Doctor’s chair, the wooden plank, broken
glass piece and the trouser, found the blood on the chair and trouser matching. (page 176)
121. PW No. 48 – Sri. Tarun Chandra Sonowal, the Jailor of North Lakhimpur, Central
Jail. He produced the Appellant, Sanjay Rajowar before the IO who collected the Appellant’s
finger prints in two sets. (page – 177)
122. PW No. 50 – Sri. Nirmal Kumar Laskar, the Learned SDJM. He on 16.09.2019 went
to Central Jail and conducted TIP of three witnesses. (a) Manoj Das identified all the 32
Page No.# 105/114
accused Persons in the third round, (b) Rupam Saikia identified all in the third round, (c)
Jiban Tanti identified all.(page 182) Five more witnesses were produced on the same day,
namely, Gopal Borah, Paban Garh, Pabitra Sahu, Raju Barik and Duleswar Majhi who
identified all. (page – 182)
123. PW No. 51 – Sri. Diganta Das, finger print expert. He upon examination found
the chance finger print found on the broken glass to be similar with the specimen finger print
of Sanjay Rajowar. (page -185)
124. PW No. 53 – Md. Abdus Sattar. He was working as Additional CJM and he recorded
Section 164 CrPC statements of 7 numbers of witnesses. (page – 194)
125. PW No. 54 – Sri. Sankar Chandra Rabha, the Scientific Officer. He upon
examination of blood stains found on Chair, stick, broken glass and trouser found the same as
human blood of Group “O”. (page 198)
126. PW No. 55 – Sri. Rupam Lachit, the Scientific Officer who upon examination of
viscera sent by the autopsy doctor returned the finding that the Doctor did not die of
poisoning. (page – 200).
127. PW No. 56 – Sri. Dipankar Gogoi, the Investigating Officer. He, on being
informed by the Reporter, instructed SI, ASI and other officers to go to the place of
occurrence and he on being further informed of the precarious situation, himself reached the
Teok Garden Hospital and saw 200/250 people there. Somehow with aid of more police force,
he and others took out the Doctor and reached the Jorhat Medical College & hospital where
he was declared brought dead. (page 201-203). Exhibit 61 to 80 are the photographs of the
occurrence taken by mobile phone. In Ext. 77, the nebulizer is shown attached to the electric
plug lying on one of the bed signifying that the patient was treated by the doctor. Seven
numbers of witnesses expressed threat to their lives and as such he recorded their
statements under the Witness Protection scheme on 05.09.2019 (page 208). He made a
prayer before the Court for protection of the witnesses and the Court by an Interim Order
directed for concealing their identity under the said scheme. On 06.09.2019, all these 7
witnesses were produced before the court and their statements under Section 164 CrPC were
recorded on 07.09.2019. (page 209). He thereafter made prayer for conducting the TIP which
was accordingly conducted 16.09.2019 and 17.09.2019. He collected the videos of the
occurrences from the reporters, obtained certificates too. He also took out the photo print
outs from the video. He also collected the opinion of the doctor about injuries on Sanjay
Rajowar, Ratul Rajowar, Rinku Majhi. Sanjay Rajowar had cut injuries on left palm, Ratul
Rajowar had injuries over his right middle finger, Rinku Majhi had cut injuries on left arm.
Page No.# 106/114
(page 217) These injuries are all due to their breaking the window panes and as such self
inflicted.
As far as contradictions are concerned, these are as follows, PW No. 1 did not state that
he witnessed (a) Manoj Majhi, (b) Kalanag Majhi, (c) Ratul Rajowar, (d) Kartik Bhumiz, (e)
Sanju Majhi at the place of occurrence, PW No. 2 did not state the facts, PW No. 3 stated
about threatening of the dresser and the nurse, PW No. 10 did not state about blocking the
door, PW No. 13 did not state that 108 ambulance was not allowed inside, PW No. 28 did not
state that the crowd obstructed the police and assaulted the doctor, PW No. 32 stated that
(a) Ramesh Bhumiz, (b) Taklu Rajowar, Kartik Bhumiz, Debeswar Rajowar shouting that
doctor to be thrashed, (a) Sanjay Rajowar, (b) Ratul Rajowar, (c) Rinku Majhi breaking the
glass panes, Suresh Rajowar giving blows, Siba Mahali kicking the doctor but he did not state
Bablu Rajowar, Sivcharan Mahali, Rahul Rajowar pushing the police. PW No. 36 stated Sanjay
Rajowar breaking the glass pane, pieced on the thigh of the doctor, however did not state
Rahul Rajowar pushing police, PW No. 37 did not state Jintu Majhi, Ramesh Bhumiz, Kulaguti
Rajowar, Bapai Rajowar were present, PW No. 38 stated (a) Dipak Rajowar, (b) Kishore
Bhumiz, (c) Misilal Majhi, (d) Ramesh Bhumiz, (e) Sanjay Rajowar @ Taklu instigating others
to assault doctor but did not state about Bijit Rajowar, PW No. 41 stated Arjun Majhi and
Ramesh Bhumiz instigating others to assault doctor.
31. Statements of witnesses before the Magistrate.
(a) Pabitra Sahu (PW No. 41) stated that Ajay Majhi, Kalanag Majhi, Suresh Rajowar, Bijay
Rajowar, Sanjib Rajowar, Bijit Mahali, Kalicharan Mahali punched doctor, Sanjay Rajowar broke
glass and assaulted the doctor, Batu Mahali, Taklu Mahali, Rahul Rajowar broke glass and
shoved the police, Ramesh Bhumiz, Arjun Majhi, Arun Majhi shouted to beat the doctor, Bablu
Rajowar chased the ambulance.
(b) Raju Barik (PW No. 40) – stated that Kalicharan Mahali, Sanjay Rajowar, other Sanjay
Rajowar shouting to kill the doctor, Siva Mahali, Bablu Rajowar, Debeswear Rajowar punched
the doctor, Rinku Majhi, Rahul Rajowar, Dipak Rajowar assaulted the doctor.
(c) Rupam Saikia (PW No. 37) stated that Bablu Rajowar, Ajoy Majhi, Sanjib Rajowar, Suresh
Rajowar, Sanjay Rajowar, Kalanag Majhi, Nena Mahali, Shiva Mahali, Batu Mahali, Ratul
Rajowar, Rinku Majhi, Taklu Rajowar, Rahul Rajowar, Bablu Rajowar, Dipak Rajowar, Kartik
Bhumij, all participated in the occurrence.
(d) Gopal Bora (PW No. 36) stated that Ajoy Majhi, Bablu Rajowar, Sanjay Rajowar, other
Sanjay Rajowar, Rinku Majhi, Sanjib Rajowar, Bijoy Rajowar, Batu Mahali, Kalanag Majhi,
Rahul Rajowar, Kartik Bhumiz, Kalicharan Mahali, Shiva Mahali participated, (page 898)
(e) Paban Garh (PW No. 38) stated that Tutu Majhi, Sanjib Rajowar, Bablu Rajowar, Milan
Rajowar, Suresh Rajowar, Bijoy Rajowar, Kalanag Majhi, Shiva Mahali, Batu Mahali, Ratul
Rajowar, Nina Mahali, Dipak Rajowar, Sanjay Rajowar, Taklu Rajowar, Jabra Majhi, Kishore
Bhumiz, Ramesh Bhumiz, Paban Rajowar, Deba Rajowar, Arun Majhi, Rinku Majhi participated,
(f) Jiban Tanti (PW No. 39) stated that Ajoy Majhi, Bijit Mahali, Bijoy Rajowar, Rinku Majhi,
Sanjib Rajowar, Nena Mahali, Milan Rajowar, Bablu Rajowar, Suresh Rajowar, anil Majhi, Dipak
Rajowar, Arjun Majhi, Sanjay Rajowar, Ratul Rajowar, Rahul Rajowar, Batu Mahali participated.
(g) Manoj Das (PW No. 32) stated that Suresh Rajowar, Hari Majhi, Dipak Rajowar, Arjun
Majhi, Milan Rajowar, Ajoy Majhi, Sanjib Rajowar, Kalicharan Mahali, Upendra Bhumiz, Bijoy
Page No.# 107/114
Rajowar, Kalanag Majhi, Shiva Mahali, Rahul Rajowar, Bablu Rajowar, Sanjay Rajowar,
Shivcharan Mahali, Rinku Majhi, Ratul Rajowar participated.
The learned APP also submitted that Accused no.13 was named by only two witnesses PW
No.10 and Pw No.32 whereas the other accused persons have all been seen and identied by
the three or more prosecution witnesses. She thus submits that the involment of the accused
persons in causing the injury and death of Dr.Deben Dutta has been duly proved.
128. Ms. S. Jahan, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor has relied on the following authorities:-
(i) Shashidhar Purandhar Hegde Vs. State of Karnataka , reported
in 2004 (7) Supreme 439
(ii) State of Rajasthan Vs. Shiv Charan , reported in (2013) 3 Crimes
(SC) 305
(iii) State of Karnataka Vs. T. Naseer @ Nasir @ Thandiantavida
Naseer @ Umarhazi @ Hazi, reported in (2023) 4 Crimes (SC) 228
(iv) Shahaja @ Shahajan Ismail Mohd. Shaikh Vs. State of
Maharashtra, reported in (2022) 12 SCR 196
(v) Malkhansingh Vs. State of M.P, reported in (2003) 0 SCR 443
(vi) State of Uttarakhand Vs. Kuldeep, reported in (2024) 0 Supreme
(UK) 226
(vii) State of Haryana: Rai Sahab Vs. Ram Singh, reported in 2002 (1)
Supreme 130
(viii) Chhannu Lal Verma Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, reported in (2018)
0 Supreme (SC) 1185
129. M.K Das learned counsel for the informant/Respondent No.2 in Crl.Appl No.54 of 2021
and in the Death Reference case no.2of 2020 submitted that the PW-32, Pw-34 and PW-37 all
deposed to the effect that they saw the accused Sanjay Rajowar and saw him breaking the
window plane and pierce the glass piece on the thigh of Dr. Deben Dutta. Pw-38 had also
Page No.# 108/114
deposed that he saw some persons assualtin Dr. Deben Dutta and identified Sanjay Rajowar
administering fist and leg blows on the person Dr. Deben Dutta and that Sanjay Rajowar had
not allowed the police to enter the garden hospital. He further submitted that though there
are certain discrepancies in their statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C nothing was
asked in the cross examination. He stated that the accused Sanjay Rajowar was also
identified by PW-3, PW-9, PW-10 and PW- 12.
The learned counsel submitted that PW1 heard the last word of Dr. Deben Dutta that
his femoral artery had been cut, call the Ambulance or he will die however he was not
allowed to be taken for treatment in the Ambulance by the accused persons. He submitted
that the accused made sure that the Doctor died from his injury. He also submitted that the
entire society is shoked and shaken by the act where a Doctor who was of old age while
performing his duty was killed in such a brutal manner.
130. Mr. D. Talukdar learned counsel for the respondent no.2 in Crl.Appl No. 61 of 2021
submitted that he adopts all the submissions made by the learned Addl.PP by submitted that
the evidence of the protected witnesses PW No-32, PW No-36, PW No-37, PW No-38, PW No-
39, PW No-40 and PW No-41, who are the eye witnesses have identified and proved the
involvement of the acuused persons/appellants who had caused the death of Dr. Deben Dutta
by causing grevious injury by giving fists and blows and piercing his right with a broken glass
on his body in an unlawful assembly.
131. The rival contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties have been duly
considered and the materials on record including the TCRs have been carefully examined.
132. So far as the witnesses from the side of the Tea garden is concerned, the Ejahar was
lodged by Manoj Gogoi, Senior Manager (PW3). The second FIR was lodged by the son of the
deceased which was primarily against accused Monuj Majhi which got amalgamated with the
first FIR. PW1, the Assistant Manager had deposed that 4 persons had obstructed the
ambulance. However, he did not mention the name of accused – Sanjay Rajowar. We have
also noted that no details were given by him in his examination under Section 161 CrPC and
Page No.# 109/114
further that he was not directly connected with the Teok Division of the Garden. The evidence
of PW2 does not appear to be relevant. PW3 – Informant had deposed that the information
was received from one Debojyoti regarding some problem in the garden and that fist blows
and kicks were seen to be given. As regards the video clips mentioned, those appear to have
been seized after 14-15 days. PW8, who was a Male Attendant of the Hospital did not name
the accused Sanjoy Rajowar and in the cross-examination he had stated of not making the
disclosures before the Police. Similarly, PW15 who was the Chowkidar of the Hospital had
made implications mainly against accused Monuj Majhi. Though he had named 10 accused,
before the Police he had named only two number of accused. PW25 who was working as a
Dresser in the Hospital had deposed that he did not know who were assaulting and similar
depositions have been made by PW26 – the GNM of the Hospital. As regards the deposition
of PW28 – the Assistant Manager of the Garden, he had stated in the cross-examination that
he did not disclose any name before the Police. Even the Welfare Officer of the Garden who
deposed as PW52 had stated that he had not seen the persons assaulting the deceased and
that the accused were standing on the verandah.
133. With regard to the evidence adduced from the side of the Police, PW9 who was the SI
of the Teok P.S. had desposed that the assault was made by fist blows and kicks. In his cross-
examination he said that the name of the accused were not known and further that he did
not state before the I.O. that the accused tried to assault him. As regards the evidence of
PW10, who was a Constable in the Teok P.S., it appears that no elaborate disclosures were
made by him before the I.O. PW11 who was also a Constable had named three accused
persons which did not include the name of accused Sanjoy Rajowar and there was no
disclosure of assault before the I.O.
134. As regards the witnesses from the Media, it has been argued that the certification for
the electronic evidence was not done in accordance with law and were given on subsequent
dates and that the depositions were improved versions. The learned counsel for the
appellants has also been critical of the manner of recording the evidence of the protected
witnesses, namely, PW32, PW36 to PW41. It has been submitted that the evidence is full of
Page No.# 110/114
contradictions and discrepencies. Further, the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018 which has
been framed in accordance with the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court has not been
followed in the instant case as no exercise was done for securing a Threat Perception Report.
As noted above, emphasis have been laid in the case of Mahendra Chawla (supra).
135. We have noted that though TIP were held on 16.09.2019 and 17.09.2019, the learned
Sessions Judge, in the impugned judgment has discarded the same and therefore, we are not
required go to the said aspect.
136. The conviction in the instant trial is under Sections 302/352/353/148/149 IPC r/w
Section 4 of the AMPS & MSI Act, 2011 and therefore, it is required to examine as to whether
such conviction is justified under the facts and circumstances of the case.
137. Since, the most vital section is Section 300 of the IPC which is punishable under
Section 302, it is required to be seen as to whether the offence would be one which would
come under the definition of Murder as per Section 300 of the Indian Penal Code or would
amount to Culpable Homicide not amounting to Murder.
138. The Supreme Court in the case of Anda and others. Vs. the State of Rajasthan
reported in AIR 1966 SC 148 has laid down as follows:
“5. Section 300 tells us when the offence is murder and when it is culpable
homicide not amounting to murder. Section 300 begins by setting out the
circumstance when culpable homicide turns into murder which is punishable
under S. 302 and the exceptions in the same section tell us when the offence is
not murder but culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under S.
304.Murder is an aggravated form of culpable homicide. The existence of one of
four conditions turns culpable homicide into murder while the special exceptions
reduce the offence of murder again to culpable homicide not amounting to
murder. We are not concerned with the exceptions in this case and we need not
refer to them.
…
7. …The sufficiency of an intentional injury to cause death in the ordinary way
of nature is the gist of the clause irrespective of an intention to cause death.
Here again, the exceptions may bring down the offence to culpable homicide
not amounting to murder.”
Page No.# 111/114
139. Section 300 of the IPC lays down 5 exceptions where culpable homicide would
not amount to murder. However, it is settled law that an offence under Section 299 of the
IPC not to fall under the offence of murder under Section 300 would not be restricted only
to the five exceptions. For a culpable homicide to be murder, it must come within the four
provisions of Section 300. Murder is the gravest form of culpable homicide. At this stage it
will be beneficial to refer to the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
case of State of AP vs Rayavarapu Punnayya and Anr. reported in AIR 1977 SC 45
.
“21. From the above conspectus, it emerges that whenever a court is
confronted with the question whether the offence is murder or culpable
homicide not amounting to murder on the facts of a case, it will be convenient
for it to approach the problem in three stages. The question to be considered at
the first stage would be, whether the accused has done an act by doing which
he has caused the death of another. Proof of such causal connection between
the act of the accused and the death, leads to the second stage for considering
whether that act of the accused amounts to “culpable homicide” as defined in
Section 299. If the answer to this question is prima facie found in the
affirmative, the stage for considering the operation of Section 300, Penal Code,
is reached. This is the stage at which the Court should determine whether the
facts proved by the prosecution bring the case within the ambit of any of the
four Clauses of the definition of ‘murder’ contained in Section300. If the answer
to this question is in the negative the offence would be ‘culpable homicide not
amounting to murder’, punishable under the first or the second part of Section
304, depending, respectively, on whether the second or the third Clause of Sec.
299 is applicable. If this question is found in the positive, but the case comes
within any of the Exceptions enumerated is Section 300, the offence would still
be ‘culpable homicide not amounting to murder’, punishable under the First Part
of Section 304, Penal Code.”
140. Further in the case of Kishore Singh and anr. vs. The State of M.P.
reported in AIR 1977 Sc 2267 it has been laid down as follows:
“11. The distinction between culpable homicide (Section 299, I.P.C.) and murder
Page No.# 112/114(Section 300, I.P.C.) has always to be carefully borne in mind while dealing with
a charge under Section 302, I.P.C. Under the category of unlawful homicides fall
both cases of culpable homicide amounting to murder and those not amounting
to murder. Culpable homicide is not murder when the case is brought within the
five exceptions to Section 300, I.P.C. But even though none of the said five
exceptions are pleaded or prima facie established on the evidence on record,
the prosecution must still be required under the law to bring the case under any
of the four clauses of Section 300. I. P. C. to sustain the charge of murder. If
the prosecution fails to discharge this onus in establishing any one of the four
clauses of Section 300, I. P. C., namely, 1stly to 4thly, the charge of murder
would not be made out and the case may be one of culpable homicide not
amounting to murder as described under S. 299, I. P. C.”
141. To venture into such examination certain essential facts are required to be taken
into account.
i. none of the accused persons were carrying any weapons with them.
ii. the assault upon the deceased were mainly by fist blows and kicks. Though, there is
also a stab injury, the same is however caused by a broken glass piece of the
windowpane.
iii. the stab injury is not on any known vital part of the body like the heart or neck
which may be construed to be inflicted with the intention of causing death. It was on
the thigh of the deceased which had cut the femoral artery which is an intricate
medical complication. This is even without going to the aspect of factual contradiction
in the depositions of the two eye witnesses, namely, PW36 and PW37. While PW36 had
deposed of witnessing the accused Sanjoy Rajowar piercing on the right thigh, PW37
had deposed that it was on the left thigh. At the same time, PW32 who is also an eye
witness did not mention of the accused Sanjoy giving rope with a glasspane.
Page No.# 113/114
iv. in the PM Report (Ext. 6) , 5 nos. of injuries were noted. However, in the opinion
given there is no remark that injury no. 1 can cause death.
v. the assault upon a Doctor clearly appears to be one which has arisen at the heat of
the moment as the womb was infuriated by the alleged negligence of the Doctor in
attending to a patient who needed urgent treatment and the said patient had died
before the treatment could be given.
vi. the circumstances involved do not indicate that there was any pre-meditation or
that the assault was done in cold blood.
142. In this connection it would be beneficial to refer to the case of Abani K.
Debnath and Anr. Vs State of Tripura reported in (2005) 13 SCC 422 wherein the
Hon’ble Supreme Court on noticing that the death was caused by one blow of a dao in the
spur of the moment which was preceded by a quarrel had converted the punishment from
Section 302 of the IPC to 304 Part II.
143. In the case of Pularu vs. State of M.P. reported in AIR 1993 SC 1487, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court was dealing with a case where death was caused by a single blow
with an agricultural equipment. It was held as follows:
“7. That takes us to the nature of the offence. All the three eye-witnesses have
spoken that the appellant dealt only one blow with the agricultural implement.
Having regard to the time and the surrounding circumstances it is difficult to
hold that he intended to cause the death of the deceased particularly, when he
was not armed with any deadly weapon as such. As an agriculturist he must
have been having a tabbal in his hands and if in those circumstances he dealt a
single blow it is difficult to convict him by invoking clause (1) or (3) of Section
300, I.P.C. It cannot be said that he intended to cause that particular injury
which unfortunately resulted in the fracture of bones. Therefore, the offence
committed by him would be one amounting to culpable homicide punishable
under Section 304, Part-II I.P.C. We accordingly set aside the conviction of the
appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentence of imprisonment for life
awarded thereunder. Instead we convict him under Sec. 304, Part-II, I.P.C. and
sentence him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years. The appeal is
partly allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove.”
Page No.# 114/114
144. In the case in hand, though the death was caused by a stab injury made by a broken
glass of a windowpane, the assault was not made in any vital part of the body like the neck
or head or heart but on the thigh. It is a different aspect altogether that as a result of the
stab injury, the femoral artery had been cut which was the cause of the death. Such intricate
issue concerning medical field cannot be presumed to be within the knowledge of the
accussed persons who are Tea garden labourers. Therefore, the intention to cause death
cannot be readily inferred.
145. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the discussions made we are of the
view that the conviction of the appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 54/2021 and Criminal Appeal
No. 61/2021 is liable to be made under Section 304 Part II of the IPC and accordingly altered
the charge from Section 302 against the accused persons/appellant. Consequently, the
sentence imposed upon the appellants is altered to rigorous imprisonment for a period of
10(ten) years with fine of Rs. 5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) in default of which simple
imprisonment for 6 months. The sentence under Sections 353/342/148 read with Section 149
IPC and under Section 4 of the AMSP & MSI Act as imposed by the learned Trial Court are not
interfered with and shall run concurrently. Both the appeals accordingly stand partly allowed.
146. Let the records of the case be sent back.
JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant