Back
2018 Supreme(Cal) 398
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
Joymalya Bagchi, Rajarshi Bharadwaj, JJ.
Sitaram Baskey – Appellant
Versus
The State of West Bengal – Respondent
C.R.A. 721 of 2004
Decided On : 11-01-2018
For the Appellant :Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharyya, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Madhu Sudan Sur, Advocate, Mr. Manoranjan Mahata, Advocate
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on witness testimony, motive, and physical evidence to uphold a conviction for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
Headnote:
MURDER - Indian Penal Code - Section 302 - The court upheld the conviction of the appellant for the murder of the victim based on the evidence of witnesses who saw the appellant running away from the spot with an axe in hand, the motive of the crime, and the seizure of the blood-stained axe from the appellant's possession.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of the victim, who was assaulted with an axe and subsequently died. The prosecution presented evidence of witnesses who saw the appellant fleeing the scene with the axe, and established a motive for the crime based on a dispute between the appellant and the victim regarding witchcraft accusations.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had proven the case beyond reasonable doubt, upholding the conviction and sentence of the appellant.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the presence of eyewitnesses, the motive for the crime, and the seizure of the blood-stained axe from the appellant's possession.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the testimony of witnesses who saw the appellant fleeing the scene with the murder weapon, the established motive for the crime, and the seizure of the blood-stained axe to uphold the conviction.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant's period of detention during the investigation, enquiry, and trial was set off against the substantive sentence.
Joymalya Bagchi, J.
1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.07.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Purulia, in Sessions Trial no. 13 of 2004 arising out of Sessions Case No. 24 of 2004 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only), in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months more.
2. The prosecution case, as alleged, against the appellant is to the effect that on 25.07.1999 at about 5 p.m. Sukram Hembram was assaulted by the appellant with an axe and as a result of such injury he expired. Nepal Hembram, son of the victim saw the appellant going away from the place of occurrence with an axe and found his father lying on the road with grievous injury. It was alleged that there was dispute between the appellant and the victim as the appellant had accused the victim to practice witchcraft causing illness of his daughter Sabitri Baskey. Over such issue, Nepal lodged written complaint at Bandwan P.S. against the appellant resulting in registration of Bandwan P.S. Case No. 24/99 dated 25.07.1999 under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. In the course of investigation, appellant was arrested and the weapon of assault, namely, axe was seized from his possession. The stains on the seized weapon tested positive to human blood.
3. Charges were framed under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Purulia for trial and disposal.
5. The prosecution examined 12 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. The defence of the appellant was one of innocence and false implication.
6. In conclusion of trial, the trial Judge by judgment and order dated 31.07.2004 convicting and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid.
7. Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that there is no eyewitness in the instant case. None of the prosecution witness saw the appellant to assault the victim. It is also submitted that no witness has corroborated the evidence of P.W. 1 relating to the motive for commission of crime. The seizure of the axe from the appellant has also not been proved beyond reasonable doubt. He, accordingly, prayed for acquittal of the appellant. Mr. Sur with Mr. Mahata, learned advocates appearing on behalf of the State argued that the prosecution witnesses saw the appellant ran away from the place of occurrence with the axe. Soon thereafter he was arrested and the axe was seized from his possession. The serologist’s report showed that axe was stained of human blood. The motive of the crime was also proved. These circumstances clearly established that the appellant had committed the murder of the victim.
8. Let me examine the rival versions in the light of the evidence on record.
10. P.W. 9 is the son of the victim and the de facto complainant in the case. He stated that on the day of occurrence he had gone to take bath and when he was returning after taking bath he found that his father was murdered by the appellant and the appellant was fleeing away with an axe on his shoulder. There was dispute between his father and the appellant. The appellant used to call his father ‘witch’. He submitted written complaint to the police. Chayan Singh (P.W. 12) wrote the written complaint. He signed on the written complaint marked as exbt. 5.
11. In cross-examination, he stated that he had gone to bathe in the pond when he was informed that his father had been murdered. On hearing this he along with others came to the spot and found the dead body of his father on the road. He informed his brother Suklal and went to the police station to submit complaint. At that time when he was taking bath in th
