Back
Village Club Beating Turns to Acquittal: Calcutta HC Exposes Cracks in Prosecution's Story After 38 Years
In a detailed judgment delivered on , the acquitted appellants Bishnupada Choudhury and others, overturning their conviction for . Justice Prasenjit Biswas ruled that the trial court's reliance on shaky eyewitness accounts from family members, riddled with contradictions and lacking independent backing, could not sustain the charges under . The single-judge bench emphasized the need for rigorous scrutiny of " " in such cases.
Midnight Meeting Gone Wrong: The Spark of a Deadly Dispute
The case traces back to , in Sripur village, Midnapore district. Madhusudan Garai was summoned to a late-night meeting at the local "club ghar" alongside Ganesh Santra, allegedly over an illicit affair involving a woman. According to the wife's FIR, villagers—including the appellants—brutally assaulted Garai, leaving him bleeding and semi-unconscious. He was rushed to a hospital the next morning but succumbed to injuries.
Police registered the case under , later altering to include 304 Part-I (culpable homicide). The , convicted the appellants in Sessions Trial No. 13 of , sentencing them to five years' rigorous imprisonment and a Rs. 1,000 fine.
Aggrieved, the appellants appealed in , arguing the prosecution's evidence crumbled under scrutiny.
Defense Strikes at Heart of Eyewitness Claims
Advocates for the appellants, led by , hammered on the "highly unnatural" behavior of key witnesses—PW1 (victim's wife and FIR informant), PW3 (brother), and PW4 (sister-in-law). Despite claiming to see profuse bleeding at midnight, they left the victim unattended until morning, defying "normal human behavior."
They spotlighted FIR lodging flip-flops: PW1 offered shifting tales of who drafted it (a political figure PW12 or the OC), contradicting her complaint. Medical transport also varied—villagers in FIR, police in testimony. PW3 saw only one appellant kicking; PW1 named a mob. No specific roles for most accused, no independent villagers examined despite a "crowded" scene. Victim's clothes lacked bloodstains, undermining bleeding claims.
"No specific and consistent role has been attributed to each of the appellants,"
the defense urged, demanding acquittal for failure to prove
.
State Pushes Back: Eyewitnesses and Medical Proof Suffice
For the State, defended the trial verdict, insisting PW1, PW3, and PW4 consistently fingered the appellants in a group assault at the club ghar with shared intent. Medical evidence from PW11 and PW13 corroborated grievous injuries leading to death, proving reckless acts "likely to cause death."
No major contradictions, the State argued; related witnesses are credible if reliable, and the trial court rightly convicted on the evidence mosaic.
Justice Biswas Dissects the Flaws: A Masterclass in Evidence Scrutiny
Delving deep, Justice Biswas ruled the family's inaction amid "profuse bleeding" improbable:
"Such indifferent and passive conduct is wholly inconsistent with normal human behaviour, particularly from close relatives."
Victim's blood-free clothes sealed the doubt.
PW1's FIR versions were "mutually destructive": drafted by a politician? OC-recorded? Multiple complaints?
"These inconsistent... statements... render her a wholly
."
No per accused; vague group allegations fail in multi-accused cases. PW6 (Ganesh Santra) couldn't identify assailants; investigative lapses like unseized bloodied earth and unexamined PW12 compounded woes.
Rejecting related witnesses outright is unnecessary, but
"such evidence must be subjected to greater caution... particularly where independent corroboration is lacking."
Non-examination of locals drew
.
Trial errors included improper use of unproved .
Key Observations from the Bench
"Ordinarily, when a close family member is found in an injured and bleeding condition... the natural... response would be to render immediate assistance... However... these witnesses admittedly left the victim lying at the place of occurrence."
"shake the credibility of a witness because they indicate either afterthought or an attempt to tailor the evidence."
"against a group of persons... are inherently weak... and unsafe to form the sole basis of conviction."
Freedom After Decades: Bail Discharged, Precedent Set
The appeal succeeded:
"The
... is hereby set aside."
Appellants, on bail, stand discharged, with bonds under
for six months.
This ruling reinforces safeguards for accused against over-reliance on family testimonies, demanding consistency and corroboration in riot-homicide cases. It cautions trial courts on investigative gaps, potentially easing reversals in similar rural disputes where "club ghar" kangaroo courts turn violent.
