Back
High Court Of Calcutta
SANKAR PRASAD MITRA
HOPNA HANSDA - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Respondent
C. R. A. 37 Of 1994
Decided On : 10/01/2004
MURDER - SECTION 302 IPC - CHILD WITNESS - SOLE TESTIMONY - CORROBORATION - CREDIBILITY - POLITICAL RIVALRY - EVIDENCE ACT, 1872, SECTION 164 - SOLE TESTIMONY OF CHILD WITNESS WITHOUT CORROBORATION IS DANGEROUS AND INSUFFICIENT FOR CONVICTION - CONVICTION BASED ON SOLE TESTIMONY OF CHILD WITNESS WHO WAS TUTORED AND SUBJECT TO POLITICAL RIVALRY IS UNSAFE AND LIABLE TO BE SET ASIDE.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of a woman. The prosecution's case was that the appellant attacked the victim with a hansua and killed her. The only eyewitness to the murder was the victim's son, who was a child at the time of the incident. The appellant denied the charges and claimed that he was falsely implicated due to political rivalry.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the sole testimony of the child witness was not sufficient to convict the appellant. The court noted that the child witness had been tutored by the prosecution witnesses and that there was evidence of political rivalry between the appellant and the victim's family. The court also noted that the investigating agency had not taken any effective steps to investigate the case and that the seized weapon had not been produced in court.
Issues: 1. Whether the sole testimony of a child witness is sufficient to convict an accused person. 2. Whether the evidence of a child witness who has been tutored is reliable. 3. Whether political rivalry can be a motive for false implication in a murder case. 4. Whether the failure of the investigating agency to properly investigate a case can affect the outcome of the trial.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the sole testimony of a child witness is dangerous and insufficient to convict an accused person unless it is corroborated by other evidence. 2. The court held that the evidence of a child witness who has been tutored is not reliable and cannot be used to convict an accused person. 3. The court held that political rivalry can be a motive for false implication in a murder case. 4. The court held that the failure of the investigating agency to properly investigate a case can affect the outcome of the trial and may lead to the acquittal of an accused person.
Final Decision: The court set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant and acquitted him of the charges.
( 1 ) HOPNA Hansda filed this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction dated 3. 12. 93 and sentence dated 7. 12. 93 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Malda in Sessions Trial No. 15 of 1993 arising out of session Case No. 34 of 1992 in connection with Habibpur P. S. Case No. 31/89 dated 20. 5. 1989. By the said judgment, the present appellant was found guilty under section 302 of the IPC, convicted thereunder and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default, to undergo ri for six months more.
( 2 ) THE prosecution case is that on 20. 5. 1989 at about 18. 30 hours, Gopinath Barman, prodhan of Habibpur Gram Panchayet submitted a written complaint to the O. C. of the Habibpur P. S. alleging that one Lakshmi Ram baskey informed him that while he along with his mother Dhangi Hansda, aged about 35 years, was proceeding towards Kenpukur hat for selling pork, she was attacked by the present appellant Hopna Hansda by means of one hansua and she was assaulted to death near Jodangi field within Misterpara village. Hearing this, the Prodhan went to the place of occurrence and found dhangi Hansda lying dead in a pool of blood. So, keeping Baneswar Mondal, a member of the Gram Panchayet to guard the said deadbody, he went to the police station and submitted a written complaint. The said written complaint was treated as FIR and Habibpur P. S. Case No. 31 of 1989 dated 20. 5. 1989 was started.
( 3 ) IN course of investigation, inquest was held on the deadbody and the deadbody was sent to the Superintendent of the District Hospital, Malda for post-mortem examination. Different articles were seized from the place of occurrence and the accused was arrested and on the basis of his statement one blood-stained Hansua was seized from the residence of the present appellant in presence of the witnesses on the basis of seizure list. Hansua was sent for chemical examination along with other articles. Meanwhile, minor son of the victim was placed before the Magistrate for recording his statement under section 164 of Cr. PC and after recording such statement and after collecting copies of the statement and other materials including the post-mortem report and on completion of the examination of the witnesses, a chagesheet under section 302/34 of the IPC was filed against Hopna Hansda and Marang Hansda. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and on perusal of the materials on record, the learned Sessions Judge on 8. 1. 93 framed a charge under section 302/34 of the IPC against both the committed accused persons viz. Hopna hansda and Marang Hansda. Both the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge for which the prosecution produced 14 witnesses including the I. O. However, no defence witness was produced, but the defence case as can be ascertained from the trend of cross-examination and answers given by the accused persons under section 313 of Cr. PC is that they are falsely implicated in this case due to political rivalry.
( 4 ) SO, the learned Sessions Judge after scanning the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the charge under section 302 of the IPC was proved against the present appellant Hopna Hansda and accordingly, he was convicted and sentenced in the manner indicated hereinabove.
( 5 ) HOWEVER, Marang Hansda was not found guilty to the charge for which he was acquitted.
( 6 ) IN the present appeal, the finding of the Trial Court has been challenged.
( 7 ) THE main contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the finding of the Trial Court was based on uncorroborated oral testimony of a child witness. It is also pointed out after scanning the evidence of the child witness (P. W. 1) that he was tutored by P. W. 2 and Baneswar Mondal (P. W. 4 ). Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant placing reliance on a decision of the Apex Court reported in AIR 1994 SC 1068, Arbind singh vs. State of Bihar, contended
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
