Back
High Court Of Calcutta
Kanchan Chakraborty, J.
Md. Imram Khan - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal - Respondent
C.R.A No. 55 of 2005 With C.R.A. No. 554 of 2005 With C.R.A. No. 121 of 2005 With C.R.A. No. 594 of 2005 With C.R.A. No. 337 of 2005
Decided On : May 06,2011
CRIMINAL LAW - Robbery - Identification of Accused - Evidence of Identification Parade - Corroboration - Reliability and Credibility of Witnesses - Consideration of Evidence on Record - Appreciation of Evidence by Trial Court - Interference by Appellate Court.
Fact of the Case:
In this case, four appellants were convicted for robbery under Sections 392 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by the Trial Court based on the evidence of identification in a Test Identification Parade (TIP) and other corroborating evidence. The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing that the Trial Court erred in relying solely on the TIP evidence and that the witnesses were shown the appellants prior to the TIP.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court found no merit in the appellants' arguments. It held that the Trial Court had correctly appreciated the evidence on record, including the TIP evidence, and that the witnesses had consistently identified the appellants both in the TIP and in Court. The Court also noted that the identification evidence was corroborated by other evidence, such as the recovery of the robbed taxi and the seizure of documents relating to the taxi.
Issues: 1. Whether the Trial Court erred in relying solely on the TIP evidence to convict the appellants. 2. Whether the witnesses were shown the appellants prior to the TIP, rendering the TIP evidence unreliable.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that identification in a TIP cannot be the sole basis for conviction, but in this case, the identification evidence was corroborated by other evidence, such as the recovery of the robbed taxi and the seizure of documents relating to the taxi. 2. The Court found that the witnesses had consistently identified the appellants both in the TIP and in Court, and there was no evidence to suggest that the witnesses were shown the appellants prior to the TIP.
Final Decision: The High Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the convictions of the appellants.
Kanchan Chakraborty, J.
1. THE Criminal appeal being no. CRA 55 of 2005 is filed at the instance of Md. Imran Khan challenging the judgement dated 29.11.2004 passed by Sri S. Bhattacharya, learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. V, Alipore, 24 parganas (South) in Sessions case no. 10(1), 2004 (S.T. no. 4/3 of 2004) arising out of West Port police station case no. 128 dated 17.8.2003 thereby convicting the appellant punishable under Section 392 IPC and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for a term of Seven(7) years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, to suffer S.I. for another one year. THE appellant was further sentenced for seven years for the offence punishable under Section 497. Both the offences were directed to run concurrently.
2. THE Criminal appeal being no. CRA 554 of 2005 is preferred by Badsha Khan challenging the judgment dated 29.11.2004 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. 4, Alipore, South 24 Parganas in S.T. no. 4(3) of 2004( S.C. no. 10(1) of 2004) thereby convicting the appellant for commission of offences punishable under Sections 392 and 397 of IPC and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- , in default, S.I. for further period of one year for the offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer R.I. for a period of seven years for the offence under Section 397 of IPC directing both the sentence would run concurrently.
The appeal being no. CRA 121 of 2005 is preferred at the instance of Kaniahya Bansfore challenging the judgment dated 29.11.2004 passed by the learned Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. V at Alipore, South 24 Parganas in essions Trial no. 4(3) of 2004 (S.C. no. 10(1) of 2004) thereby convicting the appellant under Section 392 and 397 of IPC and sentenced to suffer R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, S.I. for another one year and R.I. for seven years for the offence under Section 397 of IPC.
3. THE Criminal Appeal being no. 594 of 2005 is preferred by Md. Hasan Jann challenging the judgment and order dated 28.4.2005 in S.T. no. 13(3) of 2004 (S.C. no. 16(1) of 2004) passed by Sri S. Bhattacharya, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. 5, Alipore District South 24 Parganas thereby convicting the appellant and others for offence under Section 392 IPC and 397 of IPC and sentenced them to suffer R.I. for 7 yeas and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default, S.I. for two months and R.I. for seven yeas for offence under Section 397 IPC and pay a fine of Rs. 500/- with a direction that both the sentences would run concurrently.
4. THE appeal being no. CRA 337 of 2005 was filed at the instance of Md. Imran Khan challenging the judgment dated 28.4.2005 passed by Sri S. Bhattacharya learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. V, Alipore, 24 parganas (South) in West Port police station case no. 167 of 2003 dated 19.10.2003 under Section 392 and 397 of IPC thereby convicting the appellant for offence punishable under Section 392 IPC and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for a term of seven years with a fine of Rs. 1000/- and to sentence R.I. for seven years and pay a fine of Rs. 400.- for the offence under Section 397 of IPC with a direction that the sentences would run concurrently.
The appeal being no. CRA. No. 55 of 2005, CRA no. 553 of 2005 and CRA 121 of 2005 are taken up together for the sake of convenience and brevity.
5. THE appeal being no. CRA 594 of 2005 and CRA 337 of 2005 will be taken up afterwards separately. C.R.A. 55 of 2005 with C.R.A. 554 of 2005 with 121 of 2005
6. THESE three appeals are related to the same judgment and order dated 29.11.2004 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court no. V, Alipore, 24 parganas (South) in Sessions case no. 10(1), 2004 (S.T. no. 4/3 of 2004) arising out of West Port police stati
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
