Back
2018 Supreme(Cal) 172
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
Md. Mumtaz Khan, Jay Sengupta, JJ.
Hemanta Biswas – Petitioner
Versus
The State of West Bengal – Respondent
CRA. No. 609 of 2005
Decided On : 13-09-2018
For the Appellant : Siladitya Sanyal, Aamicus Curiae.
For the Respondent:Pravas Bhattacharya, Suman De, LD. Advocates.
The main legal point established is that circumstantial evidence, including the nature of injuries and motive, can support a conviction for murder under Section 302 IPC.
Headnote:
IPC - Murder - Section 302 IPC
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of his wife, who he suspected of having an extramarital affair. The victim was found with severe bleeding injuries and the appellant was apprehended with a blood-stained 'dao' at the scene.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of murder under Section 302 IPC based on circumstantial evidence, including the nature and number of injuries inflicted, and the strained family relations.
Issues: The issues included the sufficiency of evidence, the motive behind the murder, and the applicability of Section 302 IPC versus Section 304 Part I IPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the circumstantial evidence, including the apprehension of the appellant with a blood-stained weapon at the scene, and the motive of the appellant, supported the conviction under Section 302 IPC.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence imposed on the appellant were affirmed.
Md. Mumtaz Khan, J.
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant assailing the judgment, order of conviction and sentence dated July 29, 2002 and July 30, 2002 respectively passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Krishnagar, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. II of April, 2001 arising out of Sessions Case No. 7 of December, 2000 convicting the appellant for the commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for further period of one year.
2. P.W.1's daughter Kusum Biswas, since deceased, got married with the appellant about 5/6 years ago. Since after marriage they started living at the house of P.W.1 and of their wedlock two female children were born. For the last 2/3 days before the death of Kusum Biswas, appellant started suspecting his wife of having illicit relation with outsiders which gave rise to strained relation in their family life.
3. On March 6, 1998 at about 5 a.m. PW1 heard cries out from the room of Kusum shouting “maa amake kete fello, amake bachao”. On hearing this P.W.1 rushed there and found the room closed from inside. She then raised hue and cry. On hearing her cries villagers rushed there and broke open the door and found Kusum lying on the floor with bleeding injuries. They also found the appellant in the room with blood stained 'dao'. Villagers then apprehended appellant along with that weapon and tied him with rope. Kusum was shifted to hospital but on the way to hospital she succumbed to her injuries.
4. On the basis of the information given by the doctor of Arongghata BPHC, UD Case No. 7 dated March 6, 1998 was started at Dhantala P.S.
5. On the same day at 15.50 hrs, P.W.1 lodged a written complaint at the Dhantala Police Station, scribed by P.W.7, and on the basis of the same, P.W.9 started Dhantala P.S. Case No. 16 dated March 6, 1998 under section 304 IPC against the appellant and the case was endorsed to P.W.13 for investigation.
6. P.W.11 held inquest over the dead body of the victim at Aranghata Primary Health Centre morgue on the same day at 11.35 hrs., in connection with Dhantala P.S. UD Case No. 7 dated March 6, 1998 and prepared a report (Ext.5) and thereafter sent the dead body to Ranaghat Sub-divisional hospital morgue for postmortem examination.
7. On the same day at 4 P.M., P.W.10 conducted postmortem examination over the dead body of the victim and prepared a report (Ext.4). During examination the doctor (P.W.10) found 8 sharp cut injuries over the scalp, face, neck, right and left shoulders, right forearm and over the bases of the fingers of the left palm and thumb finger completely separated while the other fingers partially separated. After dissection of the dead body he also found 1'' long fracture over the middle of the vault of the scalp and haematoma on brain and opined that death was due to the effects of the above injuries which were ante mortem and homicidal in nature and those injuries may be caused by a ‘dao’.
8. P.W.13 initially investigated the case and on his transfer it was investigated by P.W.12 who then on conclusion of investigation submitted charge sheet being C.S. No. 9/99 dated January 20, 1999 under Section 304 of the IPC against the appellant.
9. On April 11, 2001, charge under Section 302 IPC was framed against the appellant and on his pleading not guilty, trial commenced.
10. Prosecution in order to prove the case examined 13 witnesses and produced and proved certain documents and thereafter on conclusion of trial after examination of the appellant under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) learned Trial Judge passed the impugned judgment.
11. Mr. Siladitya Sanyal, learned advocate appearing as an Amicus to defend the appellant submitted that the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by th
