Back
High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
ASHIM KUMAR ROY & SUBAL BAIDYA, JJ.
Nantu Roy @ Kalyan Roy & Another
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Another
C.R.A. Nos. 522 of 2003 & 525 of 2003 (Appellate Side)
Decided On : 04-12-2013
JUDGEMENT - [Nantu Roy @ Kalyan Roy and Aparajita Bose @ Munmun] - [302/120B IPC and 302/34 IPC] - [SUMMARY] The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence to prove the guilt of the appellants. The court accepted the dying declaration of the victim, Kunal, as admissible evidence and found that it implicated the appellant Nantu in the assault that led to Kunal's death. The court also relied on the evidence of witnesses who testified that Kunal had informed his mother that he was going to meet Nantu before he left his house on the day of the incident. Additionally, the court considered the strained relationship between Kunal and the appellant Munmun due to her closeness with Nantu as a relevant circumstance. The court rejected the defense's argument that the dying declaration was unreliable and that the other evidence was insufficient to prove the guilt of the appellants. The court convicted Nantu of murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment, while acquitting Munmun due to lack of sufficient evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the murder of Kunal Bose, who was found injured on the side of the road and later declared dead at the hospital. The prosecution alleged that the appellants, Nantu Roy and Aparajita Bose, had conspired to kill Kunal due to their illicit relationship and Kunal's strained relationship with Aparajita. The prosecution presented circumstantial evidence to support their claims, including a dying declaration from Kunal implicating Nantu, witness testimony about Kunal's movements before his death, and evidence of the strained relationship between Kunal and Aparajita.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dying declaration of Kunal was admissible evidence and that it implicated Nantu in the assault that led to Kunal's death. The court also found that the evidence of witnesses who testified that Kunal had informed his mother that he was going to meet Nantu before he left his house on the day of the incident was reliable. Additionally, the court considered the strained relationship between Kunal and Aparajita due to her closeness with Nantu as a relevant circumstance. The court rejected the defense's argument that the dying declaration was unreliable and that the other evidence was insufficient to prove the guilt of the appellants.
Issues: The main issues in the case were the admissibility and reliability of the dying declaration, the credibility of the witness testimony, and the significance of the strained relationship between Kunal and Aparajita.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the dying declaration of Kunal was admissible evidence under Section 32 of the Evidence Act, as it related to the circumstances of the transaction that resulted in his death. The court also found that the evidence of witnesses who testified that Kunal had informed his mother that he was going to meet Nantu before he left his house on the day of the incident was reliable and corroborated the dying declaration. Additionally, the court considered the strained relationship between Kunal and Aparajita due to her closeness with Nantu as a relevant circumstance that supported the prosecution's case.
Final Decision: The court convicted Nantu of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The court acquitted Aparajita Bose due to lack of sufficient evidence to prove her involvement in the conspiracy to kill Kunal.
Ashim Kumar Roy, J.
In a joint trial held before a Sessions Court the appellant Nantu Roy @ Kalyan Roy was found guilty on two counts, firstly, for committing offence punishable under Section 302/120B IPC and then for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 IPC and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine with default clause on both counts. Whereas the accused Aparajita Bose @ Munmun was found guilty under Section 302/120B of the Indian Penal Code and thereunder sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine with default clause.
The convict Nantu Roy @ Kalyan Roy in C.R.A. No. 522 of 2003 challenged his conviction and sentence and after admission of appeal, a Division Bench of this Court on August 17, 2005 suspended his sentence and released him on bail pending hearing of the appeal.
Similarly, the convict Aparajita Bose @ Munmun challenged her conviction and sentence in C.R.A. No. 525 of 2003. The said appeal was admitted, but on 11th of November, 2005 a Coordinate Bench turned down her prayer for suspension of sentence. Finally, on 10.4.2013 her sentence was suspended by this High Court and she was released on bail as there was no progress in the appeal and after her detention in custody for more than 12 ? years and on the background the co-convict the principal accused was on bail.
2. In gist the prosecution case goes like this;
“On May 26, 2000 at around 9.30 p.m. some passers-by while crossing Khanaberia village within the Police Station Tiljala, on hearing human screaming rushed towards that direction and found a person lying on the road with bleeding injuries. When the injured appealed to them to save his life and told that he had his wife and two minor children and it was one Kalyan Roy @ Nantu Roy with accused Gautam assaulted him and caused those injuries at the instigation of his wife Aparajita Bose @ Munmun, who developed an extra-marital affairs with the accused Kalyan Roy. Thereafter, those passers-by called a police patrol van and removed the injured to the hospital in the said van. However, at the hospital the injured was declared brought dead.
3. During investigation police examined the said passers-by and the police personnels who removed him to the hospital in a police vehicle. Since the dead body was cremated before identification, the victim was identified by his mother from the photograph of the dead body, as her son Kunal and from his personal belongings seized from his person and the place of occurrence. In the meantime, there was wide publications about the incident, in print as well as in electronic media that the victim was allegedly killed by the appellant Kalyan Roy with the help of one Gautam at the instigation of his wife Aparajita Bose @ Munmun who developed a love affairs with the accused Kalyan and wanted to get rid of him. Before her arrest the accused Aparajita Bose @ Munmun allegedly confessed her guilt before her mother-in-law and others. Police also recovered a written document appears to be the purported last Will of the victim from his office drawer.
After conclusion of investigation police submitted charge sheet against the appellants showing the co-accused Gautam as absconder.
4. In the trial the prosecution to prove its case completely relied on circumstantial evidence and to prove those circumstances examined as many as 41 witnesses. Whereas no witness was examined in his defence by the convict Nantu Roy @ Kalyan Roy, however, the convict Aparajita Bose @ Munmun examined herself as DW/1 and her brother was examined as a Court witness.
5. The following are the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution to prove its case against the appellants.
a) The evidence of the Autopsy Surgeon that Kunal suffered a homicidal death and due to the ante mortem injuries found in his person.
b) Identification of the dead body as that of the victim Kunal and his belongings.
c) The dying declaration of the victim Kunal made to the passers-by and the police personnel
AI
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
