Back
2004 (2) Crimes 222
Sikkim High Court (DB)
R.K. Patra, CJ & N. Surjamani Singh, J.
Ranjit Roy & Anr—Appellants
versus
State of Sikkim—Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 1 of 2003
Decided on 15-12-2003
Counsel for the parties:
For the Appellants :Shri N. Rai, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Shri N.B. Khatiwada, PP assisted by Shri J.B. Pradhan, Government Advocate and Shri Karma Thinlay, Assistant Govern-ment Advocate.
Important Point
Where accused was in company of deceased & after murder was found absconding & then stolen wrist watch was recovered at his instance, circumstances proved conclusively that he was guilty of murder & theft.
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 302/34 & 380/34 — Two appellants convicted under & prosecution case based on circumstantial evidence — Appellants were living in one room with PW 4 in the house of deceased — On the date of incident, husband & two children of deceased when left the house at 9 a.m., only deceased & appellants were present in house — Husband of deceased reached home at 2.30 P.M. & found deceased lying dead in piece of cloth around her neck & death was by strangulation — Both appellants were absconding & could be arrested two days after & at instance of appellant No. 2 stolen wrist watch which belonged to husband of deceased was recovered from the house of accused — Conviction of appellant No. 2 was liable to be upheld — Only circumstance against appellant No. 1 was that he was in the house on date of incident & then was absconding were not conclusive to hold him guilty — His conviction was liable to be set aside. (Paras 10 to 13)
Result: Appeal allowed partly.
Judgment
R.K. Patra, C.J.— This appeal filed on behalf of the two appellants is directed against the judgment dated 31st December, 2002 of the learned Sessions Judge (E & N) Sikkim at Gangtok in Criminal Case No. 31 of 2001 convicting them under section 302/380/34 IPC. Both of them have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) each under section 302/34 IPC. They have also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees one thousand) each for the offence under section 380/34 IPC. Both the sentences are to run concurrently.
2. The prosecution case is as follows:-
At the relevant time Monorama Devi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘deceased’) was residing near Metro Point, Gangtok in a rented house with her husband Lalan Prasad PW1 and two sons Ranjit PW2 and Raju PW3. In June, 2001 the deceased sub-let one room to Shibu PW4. The said room was being shared between Shibu PW4 and appellant No. 2 Durga Roy. In the latter part of June, the appellant No. 2 Durga Roy went to New Jalpaiguri and came back on 2nd July, 2001 with the appellant no. 1 Ranjit Roy who started living in the same room with appellant No. 2 Durga Roy as his guest. Both the appellants used to take food in Hotel Diamond, Lall Market, Gangtok. On 5th July, 2001 appellant No. 1 Ranjit Roy received a telephonic message to the effect that his mother was seriously ill and he should return home immediately. He could not go home as he had no money. On the next day, i.e., 6th July, 2001 both the appellants in pursuance of their common intention entered the room of the deceased and caused her death by strangulating her neck using a strip of cloth as a weapon of offence. They also committed theft of Sitco wrist watch belonging to Lalan Prasad PW1 and cash of Rs. 2,300/- and fled away to New Jalpaiguri where both of them arrested.
3. The plea of the appellants was one of denial.
4. The prosecution examined 16 witnesses in support of its case. There is no eyewitness to the occurrence. The prosecution relied on only circumstantial evidence.
5. The learned Session Judge on the basis of the following circumstances held the appellants guilty under section 302/380/34 IPC.
(i) Appellant no. 2 Durga Roy brought appellant no. 1 Ranjit Roy from New Jalpaiguri and put him up as his guest in the adjoining room of the deceased which was let out to him and both of them were staying in the same room.
(ii) In the morning of the incident, both of them were present in the room. The dead body of the deceased was found lying strangulated in her room with a piece of cloth tied around her neck. The said piece of cloth was brought by Shibu PW4 for tiding betel leaves and was kept in the same room where he (PW4) and appellant no. 2 Durga Roy were staying.
(iii) The Sitco wrist watch (exhibit IX) and cash of Rs. 2,300/- were found missing from the room of the deceased after the incident and the said wrist watch was recovered from the house of appellant no. 2 Durga Roy at New Jalpaiguri at his instance.
6. PW14 is the doctor who conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased. He found the following external injury:
‘(1) Deep grooved ligature mark 1.5 cm. wide at the lower boarder of the thyroid cartilage placed horizontally, completely encircling the neck covered by the two rounds of twisted ligature material.”
According to the doctor, the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of ante-mortem strangulation by ligature. He further stated that the deceased died quite sometime after she had taken meals as the food particles were in an advanced process of digestion and were not identifiable. The time of her death could be around about two hours after she took her meals. On his re-examination, the doctor further clarified that it was a case of strangulation because-
(1) There was sub-conjunctival haemorrhage which is usually not found in cases of suicidal hanging.
