Fast-Track Court Sentences Cachar Man to Life Imprisonment for Murder After 12-Year Legal Battle

12 years of legal battle came to an end on Tuesday after Fakar Uddin, a 57-year-old resident of Burunga Part III in Katigorah, Cachar, was sentenced to rigorous “life imprisonment” by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Bankim Sharma, for the murder of Ruhul Islam in 2013. The court announced the verdict on July 8, 2025, following Fakar Uddin’s conviction last Friday under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the brutal killing of 40-year-old Ruhul Islam, a resident of Bihara Part 6.

On October 14, 2013, at approximately 5:30 PM, Fakar Uddin attacked Ruhul Islam with a knife in the Laltilla area while Ruhul was travelling from his home to Hilara Bazaar. Despite sustaining severe injuries, Ruhul managed to reach Hilara Bazaar and informed locals of the attack before collapsing. The locals rushed him to Kalain Hospital, where he was declared dead on arrival.

Following the incident, Ruhul’s wife, Samina Khatun, filed a First Information Report (FIR) at the local police station on October 15, 2013. The police registered a case, conducted an investigation, and submitted evidence to the court. The trial, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Bankim Sharma, concluded with Fakar Uddin’s conviction based on witness testimonies and evidence presented by public prosecutor P.K. Patoa. Fakar Uddin was represented by advocate Dilwar Hussain Mazumdar.

The court sentenced Fakar Uddin to rigorous life imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 10,000. In case of non-payment, he will serve an additional three months in prison. The judgment, delivered on July 8, 2025, considered both aggravating and mitigating factors as per Supreme Court guidelines in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980).

The court noted the brutality of the crime, as the attack involved a single but fatal injury to Ruhul’s abdomen, causing significant suffering to the victim’s family. However, mitigating factors included Fakar Uddin’s satisfactory jail conduct, this being his first offence, and the potential for reform, though the state did not provide conclusive evidence that he posed a continuing threat to society.

The court emphasised that the punishment reflects the crime’s impact on both the victim’s family and society, aligning with the principles outlined in Ravji v. State of Rajasthan (1996), which calls for proportionate sentencing to address public abhorrence. The convict is entitled to set off the period of prior detention under Section 428 of the Cr.P.C., and a copy of the order was provided to Fakar Uddin free of cost. He was also informed of his right to appeal.

The case, registered as Sessions Case No. 48/2016, underscores the judiciary’s commitment to balancing justice with the possibility of rehabilitation. The court’s decision to opt for “life imprisonment” rather than the “death penalty” reflects the absence of the “rarest of rare” criteria, as established in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980). The judgment was pronounced in open court in the presence of both sides, and the case has been disposed of.

This sentencing marks the conclusion of a nearly 12-year legal process, bringing closure to the family of Ruhul Islam.