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

2010 Supreme(Cal) 1216

High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE & RAGHUNATH RAY
Sailen Sarkar
Versus
The State of West Bengal
C.R.A. No.630 of 2008
Decided On : 01-10-2010

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Pranab Kr. Dutta, Ms. Sabila Rahman, Advocates.
For the Respondent:R.K. Ghosal, Ms. Minoti Gomes, Advocates.

The 'last seen together' theory and absence of alibi by the accused were crucial in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

COMPLAINT - CRIMINAL LAW - Indian Penal Code, Section 302/201 - The court discussed the discovery of a dead body, identification of the victim, investigation, examination of the accused, judgment, and analysis of the evidence under Section 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code.

Fact of the Case:

The complaint was made regarding the discovery of a dead body, identification of the victim, and subsequent arrest of the accused. The accused were found guilty of the offence and convicted under Section 302/376(2)(G) of the Indian Penal Code. One of the accused was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine, while the other was absconding at the time of the judgment.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the accused guilty of the offence based on the 'last seen together' theory, disbelieving certain witnesses, rejecting extra judicial confessions, and establishing the motive/intention of the accused. The court concluded that the evidence established the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Issues: Irregularities in the investigation, discrepancy in the victim's age, blood group mismatch, non-disclosure of accused names, and lack of nexus between the victim and the accused were raised as issues.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that irregularities in the investigation did not vitiate the evidence, discrepancies in the victim's age were not significant, and the 'last seen together' theory and absence of alibi by the accused were crucial in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was directed to serve the remaining part of the sentence imposed by the trial judge.

Judgment :

ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE.J:

1. COMPLAINT: -

On or about April 16, 2001 Jogeshwar Sarkar, PW-1 made a written complaint to the officer in-charge, Gopalnagar Police Station that he along with other villagers of village Nahata, Post Office – Nahata, Police Station- Gopalnagar discovered a dead body in a sack under Nahata Bridge near his house at about 2.00 p.m. Police came and with the help of the villagers uncovered the dead body. The villagers could not identify the dead body who was female, aged about thirty-six/thirty-eight years old, according to Jogeshwar. On the basis of the said complaint the concerned Police Station initiated a case under Section 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code as P.S. Case No.31 dated April 16, 2001. The Police also started an unnatural death case no.12 of 2007 dated April 16, 2001. PW-14 , Pankaj Kumar Biswas investigated into the matter. He prepared Inquest Report appearing at pages 3-9 of the Paper Book. He also prepared a sketch map along with an index appearing at pages 10-13 thereof. PW-10 carried the postmortem examination and submitted a report appearing at page 14 of the Paper Book. The doctor opined that death was due to strangulation after commission of rape upon the victim. The doctor also opined that the approximate time of the death was sixty hours prior to conducting of the postmortem examination which was carried on September 17, 2001. According to the doctor, the death was anti mortem and homicidal in nature.

The dead body was subsequently identified. The victim was the daughter of PW-5 and PW-6. The victim was found missing from her house from the evening of April 14, 2001. After identification of the dead body the brother of the victim being PW-7 also made a written complaint as against three accused being Sailen, Samir and Babu. According to the complaint, all three approached the house of the victim and asked permission of her parents to take her to a cinema. They came at about 5’O clock in the evening when PW5 did not agree. They again came at 7’O clock in the evening and took the victim along with them. Since then the victim was missing. At about 11 p.m. the victim’s relatives being PW-4, 5 and 7 approached the accused and met them at their house. On enquiry, the accused expressed their inability to disclose the whereabouts of the victim. The Police subsequently arrested all three of them. Initially, they were absconding. Sailen was arrested on April 30, 2001, Babu was arrested subsequently, so was Samir. Since Samir was a minor his case was separately dealt with under the appropriate Juvenile Law. Sailen and Babu were chargesheeted. During trial Sailen was granted bail on July 27, 2001. He again absconded. He was re-arrested on January 25, 2008 and was again granted bail on July 11, 2008. Both the accused denied charges and opted to be tried. After the trial was complete and judgment was awaiting Babu again absconded. Sailen was however taken into custody on being found guilty of the offence by the learned Trial Judge.

2. EVIDNECE: -

VILLAGERS WHO DISCOVERED THE DEADBODY:

PW- 1; 2 & 3 (Jogeshwar Sarkar; Bhuban Debnath & Tarini Haldar):-

PW-1, 2 and 3 discovered the dead body under the Nahata Bridge. Jogeshwar was the informant. He lodged the complaint with the Police as referred to above. He was consistent with his complaint exhibited during the trial. Bhuban also discovered the dead body along with Jogeshwar. He corroborated PW-1. According to him, the female was about thirty/thirty-one years old whereas according to Jogeshwar, she was thirty-six/thirty-eight years old.

Tarini was also consistent with PW-1 and 2. They all found another sack containing one palm-shoe and wearing apparel. The place under the bridge was somehow muddy. According to Tarini, about thousand people assembled to watch the dead body. Tarini however did not say anything about the age of the victim. According to them, body was discovered at about 2.00 – 2.30 p.m. The Police conducted the post morte





































































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