SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 1545

2008(7) Supreme 485
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Calcutta High Court)
Dr. Arijit Pasayat and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.
Asraf SK and Anr. — Appellants
versus
State of West Bengal — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 720 of 2004
Decided on : 20-10-2008

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants :Pradip Ghosh, Sr. Adv., R.K. Gupta, S.K. Gupta, Arun Yadav and Manoj K. Mishra, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Avijit Bhattacharjee, Saumya Kundu and Subrata Biswas, Advocates.

IMPORTANT POINT
Where a case rests squarely on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with the innocence of the accused or the guilt of any other person.

Headnote:(a) Criminal Trial – Circumstantial evidence – Where a case rests squarely on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with the innocence of the accused or the guilt of any other person – The circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances. (Para 5)

        AIR 1977 SC 1063; AIR 1956 SC 316; AIR 1983 SC 446; AIR 1985 SC 1224; AIR 1987 SC 350; AIR 1989 SC 1890; AIR 1954 SC 621; (1996) 10 SCC 193 – Relied upon.

        (b) Criminal Trial – Circumstantial evidence – The tests which must be satisfied, re-stated. (Paras 7, 9, 12)

        AIR 1990 SC 79; 1992 Crl.LJ 1104; AIR 1952 SC 343; AIR 1984 SC 1622; (2003)8 SCC 180; (2003)11 SCC 261; Criminal Appeal No.180/2001 – Relied upon.

       Facts of the case :

        1. Anita Pal (PW-1) alleged that her niece Kumari Archana Pal, aged about 16 years was kidnapped by the appellants. Kumari Archana Pal was the daughter of her sister Pasani Pal (PW-2) who is daughter of the deceased.

        2. On the date of occurrence the said appellant was seen loitering openly around their house. Her elder sister Pasani Pal upon seeing the appellant no.1 became emotional and started crying. Appellant no.1 Asraf Sk. alongwith appellant no.2 Rashid Molla Suddenly entered their house and assaulted P.W. 2 for crying loudly and threatened that they would murder every member of the family of the deceased.

        3. After about 8 p.m. the deceased went out to the field to ease himself. Immediately the witnesses saw the two appellants following the deceased quickly. The deceased having not returned home despite passage of 5/7 minutes since he left for the field, P.W. 1 alongwith P.W.2 Pasani Pal became suspicious and they went out in search of their father.

        4. As soon as they reached near the local hat (market) they noticed that their father Shibcharan Pal, aged about 65/70 years was lying dead on the steps of the tank on the southern side situated near the hat (market).

        5. The present appellants were convicted while accused Basir Sk. was acquitted.

        6. The High Court confirmed the conviction.

       Finding of the Court :

        Prosecution has failed to establish the accusations.

       Result : Appeal allowed, accused persons acquitted.

       

JUDGMENT

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —

1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court upholding the conviction recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 12th Court, 24 Parganas (South) in Sessions Trial No.1(6) of 1988. Both the appellants were convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ‘IPC’) and sentenced to imprisonment of life.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Jayanta Kr. Mukherjee (PW-12) was posted as Officer-in-Charge of Bishnupur Police Station at the relevant point of time. On 18.08.83 at about 0.02 hours when this witness came to Jhanpur Keyatala Hat, he received written complaints of Anita Pal (PW-1) alleging, inter-alia, that her niece Kumari Archana Pal, aged about 16 years was kidnapped by the appellants. Kumari Archana Pal was the daughter of her sister Pasani Pal (PW-2). Her niece could not be traced out since she was kidnapped by appellant no.1 Asraf Sk. and further that as appellant no.1 Asraf Sk. was absconding and on the date of occurrence the said appellant was seen loitering openly around their house. Her elder sister Pasani Pal upon seeing the appellant no.1 became emotional and started crying. On 17.08.1983 early in the evening, when PW-2 was so crying loudly, appellant no.1 Asraf Sk. alongwith appellant no.2 Rashid Molla Suddenly entered their house and assaulted P.W. 2 for crying loudly. Seeing this, Shibcharan Pal (hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’) being the father of P.Ws. 1 and 2 came out from his hut and protested against the acts of the appellants in assaulting P.W.2. At this the appellants threatened that they would murder every member of the family of the deceased. Apprehending danger, P.W. 1 alongwith the deceased went to the house of one Suphal Pal, being a local leader, to complain about the aforesaid incident. But said Suphal Pal was not available at his residence then. Thereafter they reported the incident to one Shah Alam Molla, being a member of the local Panchayat. Shah Alam Molla assured P.W. 1 and her father that necessary steps would be taken on the next day. Thereafter they returned home at about 8 p.m. After returning back home, the deceased went out to the field to ease himself. Immediately the witnesses saw the two appellants following the deceased quickly. They became suspicious about the movement of the two appellants. The deceased having not returned home despite passage of 5/7 minutes since he left for the field, P.W. 1 alongwith P.W.2 Pasani Pal became suspicious and they went out in search of their father.

As soon as they reached near the local hat (market) they noticed the two appellants were running away quickly “by their side”. Soon after they noticed their father Shibcharan Pal, aged about 65/70 years was lying dead on the steps of the tank on the southern side situated near the hat (market). The legs of the deceased were lying submerged in the water of the tank while upper part of the body was lying above water on the bank. They further alleged in the said complaint that their father was murdered by throttling and other methods. They further expressed their suspicion that at about 8 p.m. appellants Asraf Sk., Rashid Molla and others had murdered their father by throttling and by torturing him and left the dead body on the bank of the tank of Keyatala Market (hat) and fled away. This Complaint was reduced into writing by the scribe, Niranjan Pal (PW-9) and handed over to P.W.14 when he came to the place of occurrence. Said complaint was taken to the police Station and was registered as an F.I.R. under Section 302/34 I.P.C., against the two appellants at 3.30 a.m. on 18.8.1983. After investigation Police submitted charge sheet against the two appellants and one Basir Sk. (since acquitted). The case was committed to the Court of Session, North 24, Parganas. On perusal of the materials on record learned trial Court framed charges agai

































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top