SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
T.S. Thakur, R. Banumathi, JJ.
DILIP KUMAR MONDAL & ANR. – Appellants
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 82 OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 9447/2012)
Decided On : 14-01-2015
(b) Criminal trial – Appreciation of evidence – Injured witness – Evidence of injured witnesses entitled to great weight – Instantly, evidence of the injured witnesses remaining consistent, notwithstanding searching cross-examination – Conviction on that basis – Not assailable. (Para 13, 17)
(c) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 300 Exception 4 – Deceased receiving two incision injuries – Injuries to others not grievous – Accused-appellants carrying normal agricultural equipments which were used as weapons – Sudden free fight without premeditation – Case falls within section 300, exception 4 – Section 302 not attracted – Sentence modified. (Para 23, 24)
(2004) 11 SCC 395 – Relied upon
Facts of the case:
Complainant Fatik Chandra Debnath is the brother of the deceased Nripen Debnath. On 22.11.1998 at about 10.00 A.M. the complainant along with his two sons namely, Ranjit Debnath and Santosh Debnath was doing agricultural work in his field. Deceased Nripen Debnath, brother of the complainant and his son Nikhil Debnath proceeded towards the field in a bullock cart for bringing the bundles of harvested paddy crops. The only way to reach their field was through the field belonging to the accused persons and as soon as the bullock cart touched the border of the field of the accused, the accused took exception to the same, which resulted in a wordy altercation between the parties and injuries were inflicted by the appellants on the deceased and witnesses.
Nripen Debnath succumbed to the injuries on his way to the hospital.
Fatik Chandra Debnath lodged a complaint at Police Station Raninagar, District Murshidabad.
The Sessions Court convicted the appellants under Sections 302/34 IPC and 326/34 IPC.
Accused Arjun Mondal was acquitted of all the charges giving him the benefit of doubt.
Fourth accused-Vipad died pending trial.
The appellants preferred appeal before the High Court which has confirmed the conviction of the appellants under Section 302/34 IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on them. Their conviction under Section 326 IPC was set aside.
Finding of the Court:
The case falls within section 300 Exception 4, and not section 302.
Result: Appeal partly allowed, sentence modified.
JUDGMENT
R. BANUMATHI, J.
Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises out of the judgment of the Calcutta High Court dated 13.2.2012 passed in C.R.A. No.747/2008, in and by which, the High Court confirmed the conviction of the appellants under Section 302/34 IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment imposed upon them and set aside the conviction of the appellants under Section 326 IPC.
3. Briefly stated case of the prosecution is as under:-Complainant – PW 3 –Fatik Chandra Debnath is the brother of the deceased Nripen Debnath. On 22.11.1998 at about 10.00 A.M. the complainant along with his two sons namely, PW-11 Ranjit Debnath and PW-12 Santosh Debnath was doing agricultural work in his field–collecting harvested paddy crops and tying the same. Deceased Nripen Debnath, brother of the complainant and his son Nikhil Debnath (PW-10) proceeded towards the field in a bullock cart for bringing the bundles of harvested paddy crops. The only way to reach their field was through the field belonging to the accused persons and as soon as the bullock cart touched the border of the field of the accused, the accused took exception to the same, which resulted in a wordy altercation between the parties and injuries were inflicted by the appellants on the deceased and witnesses. Appellant Dinesh inflicted injuries in the abdomen of Nripen Debnath with the pasli and the appellant Dilip attacked him with a dau. The other two accused also assaulted the deceased. When Nikhil Debnath (PW-10) tried to rescue his father, he was also badly beaten by the accused. On seeing the incident, PW-3 –Fatik Chandra Debnath rushed to the place of incident and raised alarm. In the process, PW 11– Ranjit Debnath and PW-12–Santosh Debnath also sustained injuries. On hearing hues and cries, the villagers gathered at the place and the accused fled away.
4. All the four injured persons were immediately taken to Godhanpara Hospital wherein PW-10–Nikhil Debnath and PW-11 –Ranjit Debnath were discharged after first aid. As the condition of Nripen Debnath and PW-12 Santosh Debnath was precarious, they were referred to N.G. Hospital, Berhampore. Nripen Debnath succumbed to the injuries on his way to the hospital.
5. Law was set in motion by PW-3 Fatik Chandra Debnath by lodging a complaint at Police Station Raninagar, District Murshidabad. On the basis of the complaint, a case was registered under Section 302/34 IPC and 326/34 IPC against the accused persons. PW-14 Dr. Gobinda Banerjee conducted autopsy on the body of Nripen Debnath and PW-14 opined that the death was due to shock and haemorrhage and issued Ex P6Post mortem certificate. After completion of due investigation, chargesheet was filed against the appellants and two other accused under the above stated provisions. To prove the charges against the accused, prosecution has examined 16 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents and material objects. The accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. about the incriminating evidence and the circumstances but the accused denied all of them and pleaded innocence. The accused have stated that they have been falsely implicated due to political rivalry and they have been victimized .
6. Upon consideration of oral and documentary evidence, the Sessions Court convicted the appellants under Sections 302/34 IPC and 326/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-with default clause. For the offence under Section 326 IPC, the accused were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-with default clause. Accused Arjun Mondal was acquitted of all the charges giving him the benefit of doubt. Fourth accused-Vipad died pending trial. Aggrieved by the conviction, the appellants preferred appeal before the High Court of Calcutta which by the impugned judgment has confirmed the conviction of the appellants under Section 302/34 IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on them. Their conviction un
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.