Back
2014 Supreme(Cal) 710
High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
NISHITA MHATRE & SAMAPTI CHATTERJEE, JJ.
Nandalal Das @ Nandu
Versus
The State of West Bengal
C.R.A.No. 839 of 2006 (Appellate Side)
Decided on: 03-12-2014
Advocate Appeared
For the Appellant:Sanjoy Banerjee, Advocate.
For the Respondent:Pawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate.
In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt a chain of circumstances that leads to the only inference of the accused's guilt, excluding the possibility of the guilt of any other person.
Headnote:
Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Absence of Motive - Identification of Accused - Recovery of Articles - Chain of Evidence - Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt.
Fact of the Case:
The deceased's body was found in a cardboard box with amputated legs. The police investigation led to the arrest of the appellant, who was an employee of the deceased's employer. The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, including the identification of the appellant by a van rickshaw puller who allegedly transported the carton, the seizure of an ash-colored vest allegedly given to the appellant by the deceased's employer, and the recovery of cobbler's tools from the appellant.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution's case was based on a fantastic tale and that the circumstances relied on by the prosecution did not form a chain which led to the only inference, namely, the guilt of the accused. The court held that the links in the chain which the prosecution had tried to establish had not been proved beyond reasonable doubt and that they did not exclude the evidence of guilt of any person other than the accused.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had established a chain of circumstances leading to the only inference of the appellant's guilt. 2. Whether the identification of the appellant by the van rickshaw puller was reliable. 3. Whether the seizure of the ash-colored vest and the cobbler's tools connected the appellant to the crime. 4. Whether the prosecution had proved the appellant's motive to commit the crime.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances must form a chain which leads to the only inference, namely, the guilt of the accused. 2. The identification of the accused must be reliable and not based on mere speculation or conjecture. 3. The recovery of articles from the accused must be connected to the crime and must not be capable of an innocent explanation. 4. The prosecution must prove the accused's motive to commit the crime, as the absence of a motive is a circumstance in favor of the accused.
Final Decision: The court set aside the conviction and punishment imposed on the appellant by the Trial Court and acquitted him.
Nishita Mhatre, J.
1. On 6th November, 2003, the Beliaghata Police Station received an anonymous telephone call that a card board carton with a dead body in it was found near the Chaul Patti Road alongside Beliaghata canal. The S.I., who received the phone call, went to the spot and found a Samsung T.V. carton. A dead body was kept inside that box. The legs were amputated at the knees. The box was covered by a nylon gunny bag and the deceased was wearing a white shirt, half sleeve vest and a checked lungi. A gamcha was placed on the body. The lower limbs were found near the body. The police officers completed the requisite formalities after making the seizure. The written complaint was filed by S.I., Ujjal Roy, in which he mentioned the description of the body found in the carton. The body was photographed and sent for post mortem examination. Since there was no claimant of the body, a notice was published in a Hindi daily newspaper on 12th October, 2003 with the photograph of the deceased. On seeing this notice, one Brahmadeo Das – PW 19 informed the police that the deceased was Mitan Das and was his brother-in-law. The investigation was transferred to the Homicide Squad of the Detective Department. Ultimately the investigation led to the arrest of the appellant herein on 15th November, 2004, almost a year after the body was found.
2. The appellant was tried by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Sealdah, South 24 Parganas, in Sessions Case No.63(4) of 2005. The charge framed against him was under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC. The Trial Court has convicted the appellant and sentenced him for having committed an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 235 of the Cr.P.C. He has been sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of payment of fine he has been sentenced to suffer further imprisonment for one year.
3. The charge framed against the appellant is that on 6th November, 2003 at about 7.35 a.m. he and his associate Binode Das in furtherance of their common intention murdered Mitan Das by throttling him after amputating both his legs below the knee joints. Binode Das has been absconding and was not tried.
4. In order to bring home the charge against the appellant, the prosecution has relied on the testimony of 21 witnesses, including the investigating officers. The complainant Ujjal Roy, S.I. of Beliaghata Police Station, has been examined as PW 14. He has spoken of receiving the anonymous telephone call informing him of a body being concealed in a carton. He has stated that he left for the scene of offence along with S.I., J. Jana – PW 20. He has described the state of the carton which they found near the Beliaghata canal. According to him the deceased was 56 years old and was strongly built. His left thigh was tied with a yellow electric wire whereas the right thigh was tied with a cotton thread and the legs had been amputated below the knee joints. This witness had conducted the inquest and the report has been exhibited. The body was photographed and according to this witness the photographs were shown to the persons in the locality. However nobody could identify the deceased. He has mentioned that the photograph was published in a Hindi daily newspaper on 12th October, 2003. He has spoken about the seizure of several articles including the card board carton and the gunny bag. He has identified the clothes that the deceased was wearing in Court and mentioned that a banian was stitched to the nylon gunny bag which covered the carton.
5. PW 1 is the plan maker. He has drawn the sketch map of the place of occurrence and its surroundings.
6. PW 2 is the photographer who took photographs of the deceased and later on 24.11.2004 he was directed to photograph a construction on 11 C, South Sealdah Road.
7. PWs 3 and 4 are witnesses to the inquest. They have spoken about an ash colour vest being seized
