The main legal point established in the judgment is the standard of proof required for conviction based on circumstantial evidence, including the admissibility of identification evidence and the recovery of items linked to the crime.

Ashim Kumar Roy, J.

Samir Sarkar @ Raka, Debashis Ojha @ Mithu and Amit Mahato @ Bapan, these three appellants were placed on trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 13th Court, Alipore, 24-Parganas (South) to answer charges for having committed offences punishable under Sections 302/201/34 IPC.

2. The charges levelled against them based on the allegations that on February 6, 2001, at around 8.50 hrs., the Sub-Inspector of Police Jugal Kishore Dha (PW/3) at Entally Police Station received an anonymous telephonic call that a female dead body was found floating on the canal opposite to 8B, South Sealdah Road. Immediately, upon receipt of such information and diarizing the same, PW/3 rushed to the spot and with the help of local people the body was retrieved and was taken to the NRS Hospital, and was declared “brought dead”. The PW/18 conducted the post mortem and found multiple external bruises and abrasions and marks of ligature. On dissection certain other internal injuries were found. According to the doctor the death was due to the effect of strangulation by ligature and smothering associated with head injuries and ante mortem and homicidal in nature. In the meantime, the PW/11, a taxi driver came to the police and at the morgue identified the dead body as the girl, whom he dropped near to the place of occurrence along with four other boys at around 11/11.30 pm at the fateful night, February 5, 2001. The police then found out two other witnesses, viz., PW/4 and PW/5, who informed the police that they saw the girl in a taxi with four other boys about half an hour before the PW/11 dropped her. They also identified the appellants in T.I. Parade as the boys whom they found with the victim in the taxi.

3. After completion of investigation, the police submitted charge sheet against the appellants under section 302/201/34 IPC.

4. The prosecution based its case on circumstantial evidence and to prove the circumstances against the appellants examined total 21 witnesses. However, none of the appellants examined any witnesses in their defence and they pleaded not guilty and claimed to have been falsely implicated.

5. At the conclusion of the trial the learned trial Judge found all the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution against the appellants have been proved beyond all reasonable doubt and convicted them for the offences punishable under section 302/34 IPC and 201/34 IPC and sentenced them to suffer imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for 5 years respectively and fine with default clause.

6. All three convicts together filed CRA 538 of 2007 from jail and the appellant Debashis Ojha @ Mithu and Amit Mahato @ Bapan filed two separate appeals through their respective lawyers being CRA 115 of 2004 and CRA 116 of 2004. However, during the pendency of the above appeals, the appellant no. 1 Debashis Ojha @ Mithu in CRA 538 of 2007 and the sole appellant in CRA 115 of 2004 expired on September 03, 2009 and such facts being reported to a co-ordinate bench of this court an order was recorded to the effect the appeals stood abated.

7. On perusal of the records, we find the following circumstances were relied on, against the appellants by the prosecution,

(a) The victim suffered a homicidal death caused by ante-mortem strangulation with ligature and smothering, associated with head injuries, was the outcome of the post-mortem held by the PW/18.

(b) Identification of the appellants by PW/5, PW/6 and PW/11 both in T.I. Parade and in court as the miscreants in whose company the victim was last found alive.

(c) The victim was found killed within a very short gap from the time she was last found alive in the company of the appellants.

(d) The recovery of mobile phone of the victim in terms of the provisions of section 27 of the Evidence Act at the behest of the appellant Amit Mahato @ Bapan.

(e) The place where the taxi driver dropped the victim with the appellants and the place from where on the next day her dead body w