Back
2016 Supreme(Cal) 470
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Debasish Kar Gupta & Md. Mumtaz Khan, JJ.
Munkir Sk. & Another – Appellants
Versus
The State of West Bengal – Respondent
CRA No. 800 of 2006
Decided On : 05-10-2016
For the Amicus Curiae : Mr. Kushal Kr. Mukherjee and Mr. Kunal Ganguly.
For the Respondents: Mr. Manjit Singh and Mr. Ranabir Roy Chowdhury.
The court's decision highlights the importance of considering the totality of the evidence, including eyewitness testimony, post-mortem reports, and motive, in determining the guilt of the accused in a murder case.
Headnote:
Murder - Motive - Sections 302/34, 201/34 IPC, Section 27 Arms Act - The court analyzed the evidence and legal provisions, including the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Arms Act, to determine the guilt of the appellants in a murder case. The court's decision was influenced by the presence of a motive, eyewitness testimony, and the post-mortem report.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were accused of murdering Ekamuddin Sk. by shooting him and stabbing him multiple times. The deceased's brother, Niyamat Sk., witnessed the attack and identified the appellants. The police investigated, prepared an inquest report, and conducted a post-mortem examination, which confirmed the cause of death as shock and hemorrhage due to the injuries.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented by the prosecution, including the eyewitness testimony, the post-mortem report, and the motive for the crime, was sufficient to establish the guilt of the appellants beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also rejected the appellants' arguments regarding false implication, contradictions in the prosecution's case, and the withholding of evidence.
Issues: 1. Whether the appellants were falsely implicated in the case due to the alleged drawing of two FIRs. 2. Whether there were major contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses that affected the core of the prosecution's case. 3. Whether the prosecution withheld evidence by not producing the officer-in-charge of the police station and the owner of the land where the incident occurred. 4. Whether the court violated the provisions of Section 54 of the Indian Evidence Act by considering the past history of the appellants to find them guilty.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the evidence on record did not support the appellants' claim of false implication, as the FIR was drawn after a proper investigation and contained the names of the appellants. 2. The court found that the discrepancies in the prosecution witnesses' evidence were minor and did not affect the core of the case. 3. The court held that the prosecution was not required to produce the officer-in-charge of the police station and the owner of the land as witnesses, as their evidence was not necessary to establish the guilt of the appellants. 4. The court held that the antecedents of the appellants were not considered by the trial judge in finding them guilty, so there was no violation of Section 54 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the appellants' conviction for murder under Sections 302/34, 201/34 of the IPC, and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Debasish Kar Gupta, J.
1. This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated September 16, 2006 and sentence dated September 19, 2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court, Rampurhat, District-Birbhum in Sessions Trial No. 13 of 2003 arising out of Sessions Case No. 38 of 2000 convicting the appellants for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the I.P.C.) as also under Section 27 of the Arms Act read with Section 34 of the I.P.C.
2. On September 23, 1998 one Ekamuddin Sk. (deceased person), son of late Taiyab Sk. of village-Bankura, Police Station-Maheshpur, District-Birbhum was returning back to his home from Pakur after completion of his work. He got down from train at Murarai station. Then he took his bicycle from the Tailor’s shop “Samrat Tailor”. He kept his bicycle at the house of a known person situated at Village-Bhushana. He started the journey on foot through a narrow lane leading towards his home. At that point of time his elder brother Niyamat Sk. (PW 2) came to receive him. He was moving down the above lane keeping his aforesaid brother (the deceased person) behind him. He looked at his back hearing a noise. He found that the appellants had attacked the deceased person. Appellant Jenhar Sk. caught hold of the hands of the deceased and appellant Munkir Sk. opened fire from his firearm aiming at the deceased. Out of fear, the PW 2 started running towards his village. After informing the villagers of the above incident, he came back to the place of occurrence along with other villagers including PW 1 and PW 6. Though they found blood stain at the place of occurrence, the deceased person could not be found out by them. They went to the Murarai Police Station. After informing the above incident, they came back to the place of occurrence with police. Even then the deceased person could not be traced out.
3. On the next date, i.e. on September 24, 1998, PW 1, PW 2, PW 6 and others went to the place of occurrence once again. Following the mark of blood stain on the earth they reached to the bank of river “Paglanadi” and found the dead body of the deceased person.
4. Immediately, PW 1 submitted a written complaint dated September 24, 1998 to the Officer-in-Charge, Murarai Police Station, Birbhum. After recording the above incident under G.D.E. No. 1010 dated September 24, 1998 at 11.15 hours, the Officer-in-Charge, Murarai Police Station, Birbhum, drew the formal FIR bearing Murarai P.S. Case No. 68/98 dated September 24, 1998 incorporating the names of the appellants therein for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302/201/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 25/27 of the Arms Act. PW 7 was engaged as Investigating Officer to investigate into the above case.
5. PW 7 went to the place of occurrence. He prepared the rough sketch map with index of the place of occurrence. He also prepared the inquest report dated September 24, 1998 over the dead body of the deceased person with reference to the above FIR. The history revealed from the preliminary investigation was also incorporated in the above inquest report. The PW 7 further seized wearing apparels of the deceased person (sky colour jeans pant and a belt fixed with it, one shirt and one Parko 1210 Pen) under seizure list. A bunch of paddy plant stained with mud and blood was also seized under seizure list. The dead body of the deceased person was forwarded to the Rampurhat Police Morgue through the PW 5 for post mortem examination.
6. Post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased person was conduced by PW 4 on September 24, 1998 with reference to the U.D. Case No. 9/98 and Murarai P.S. Case No. 68/98, both dated September 24, 1998 and the post mortem report was prepared at 16.00 hours. According to the post mortem report, one bullet injury and multiple stab injuries were detected over the dead body. According to the above post mortem repo
