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

2006 Supreme(Cal) 799

High Court Of Calcutta
Alok Kumar Basu And Partha Sakha Datta, JJ.
LIYAKAT SARDAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Respondent
C. R. A. 289 Of 2001
Decided On : 12/18/2006

Advocates Appeared:
L.M.DUTT, SUBIR GANGULY

The credibility of witness testimony and the consistency of evidence are crucial in establishing guilt in criminal cases.

Headnote:

IPC - Murder - Section 302/34 IPC - Summary: The court upheld the conviction of the appellants under section 302/34 IPC for the murder of the deceased. The prosecution's case was supported by the evidence of witnesses who saw the appellants fleeing from the scene and heard the deceased naming the appellants as his assailants. The court found the prosecution's evidence credible and dismissed the appeal.

Fact of the Case:

The deceased was murdered on his way back home, and the appellants were convicted under section 302/34 IPC based on the evidence of witnesses who saw them fleeing from the scene and heard the deceased naming them as his assailants.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the prosecution's evidence credible and upheld the conviction of the appellants.

Issues: The credibility of the prosecution's evidence, the reliability of witness testimony, and the location of the occurrence were key issues in the case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the consistency of witness testimony, the presence of the deceased's statement in the FIR, and the lack of evidence contradicting the prosecution's case to uphold the conviction.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the judgment and order of the trial court were confirmed.

P. S. DATTA, J.

( 1 ) THE two appellants namely Liyakat Sardar and Nabiruddin sardar assail judgment and order of conviction under section 302/34 IPC and sentence of life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,000/- with default stipulation as was rendered by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, First court, Nadia on 19. 05. 2001 in S. C. No. 23 (8) of 1998.

( 2 ) THE deceased Kader Box Sardar, a resident of village Suvarajpur under p. S. Karimpur had been to the house of P. W. 8 Mohiruddin Mallick at about 3 p. m. on 02. 11. 1995 in connection with 'halkhata' ceremony and on his way back at about 7. 30 p. m. he was killed by the two appellants. On hearing cry "they killed me, save me" emanating from the side of the primary school of the village P. W. 1 Jan Box Sardar, his elder brother Rahim Box Sardar (P. W. 2)and other brothers as also local people rushed to the spot and found the two appellants fleeing away. Kader Box who sustained multiple bleeding injuries on different parts of the body told P. W. 1 and his companions that the two appellants of the village had caused grievous bleeding injuries to him by means of sharp-cutting weapon. Kader Box was taken to Karimpur Hospital but on the way he expired.

( 3 ) THIS was the FIR lodged by Jan Box Sardar (P. W. I) with Karimpur police Station at 22. 15 hours on 2. 11. 1995, which registered Karimpur Police station Case No. 248/95 dated 2. 11. 2995 against the two appellants under section 302/34 of the IPC and upon completion of investigation submitted chargesheet against them under the said sections of the law.

( 4 ) OF the 15 witnesses examined by the prosecution it is the evidence of the FIR maker Jan Box Sardar (P. W. I), P. W. 2 Rahim Box Sardar, P. W. 3 nur Box Sardar, P. W. 4 Khoda Box Sardar, brothers of the deceased, P. W. 5 abdul Rejjak Sarkar, nephew of the deceased, P. W. 6 Tatila Bewa, wife of the deceased, P. W. 7 Golam Sardar another nephew of the deceased that call for consideration inasmuch as their evidence touch upon the fact-in-issue. Evidence of P. W. 8 Mohiruddin Mallick is important only to the extent that on the relevant date the deceased had come to his shop to attend 'halkhata' ceremony. Though P. W. 9 Tahirun Bibi, a co-villager does not claim to have seen the appellants having caused assault on the deceased, her evidence is relevant to the extent that about 7. 30 p. m. when she along with other three women was proceeding to attend to nature's call they heard a groaning sound and being attracted by their hue and cry local people came to the spot. P. W. 13 Dr. Ajit Kumar Biswas who held post-mortem examination found nine injuries of different shapes and sizes located on the neck, back of the shoulder joint, occipital region, back of the chest and other parts of the body. P. W. 15 Asoke Kr. Roy is the I. O. of the case.

( 5 ) A brief narration of evidence of the eye-witnesses and the witnesses who rushed to the spot immediate after the occurrence would not be out of place so as to appreciate the merit of the prosecution case as also of the appeal and while proceeding to do so it is worthwhile to state that the prosecution case rests on two-fold pieces of evidence namely when P. W. I, p. W. 2, P. W. 3, P. W. 4 and others on being attracted by hue and cry rushed to the spot they found the two appellants fleeing away from the spot, and secondly the deceased told the witnesses that the two appellants Liyakat sardar and Nasirudding Sardar had caused grievous assault to him by means of sharp-cutting weapon. Importantly, these two pieces of evidence which is the touchstone of the prosecution case found their berth in the FIR which was lodged within three hours from the time of the occurrence, and the distance between the place of occurrence which is the village of Suvarajpur and Karimpur is 14 kilometers.

( 6 ) P. W. 1's evidence is that at about 7. 30 p. m. when his brother Kader box Sardar was returning home from the shop of Mohiruddin Mallick (P. W. 8)he










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
whatsapp-icon Back to top