Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Joymalya Bagchi, Suvra Ghosh, JJ.
SK Anarul - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 547 of 2014
Decided On : 13-01-2020
Indian Penal Code - Assault - Sections 302, 304 Part I - The court discussed the prosecution's case against the appellant for assaulting the victim resulting in her death. The court found the evidence of the eyewitnesses and the post-mortem doctor to be consistent in establishing the cause of the victim's injury, leading to the conviction of the appellant under Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for assaulting and causing the death of the victim during a quarrel over the keeping of manure on a piece of land.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of causing the victim's death but altered the conviction from Section 302 to Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code based on the circumstances of the incident.
Issues: The main issue was the nature of the appellant's actions leading to the victim's death and the appropriate section of the Indian Penal Code under which the appellant should be convicted.
Ratio Decidendi: The consistent evidence of the eyewitnesses and the post-mortem doctor led the court to conclude that the appellant's actions warranted a conviction under Section 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code.
Final Decision: The appellant was directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months more.
JUDGMENT
Joymalya Bagchi, J. - The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.7.2014 and 31.7.2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bolpur, Birbhum in Sessions Trial No.2 (June), 11 arising out of Sessions Case No.67 of 2010 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/-.
2. Prosecution case, as alleged, against the appellant is to the effect that on 12.11.2007 appellant had kept fertilizer on the land of Sk. Keramat (P.W. 6). When Sk. Keramat requested the appellant to remove the fertilizer a quarrel ensued amongst themselves around 1:00 p.m. In the course of quarrel, other accused persons arrived at the spot being armed with various weapons and attacked Sk. Keramat. Wife and son of Sk. Keramat (P.W.s 9 and 2), his brother Sk. Samsul (P.W. 1), his son (P.W. 8) and wife (the deceased) rushed to the spot to help Keramat. A free fight ensued. Sk. Samsul and others suffered injuries. In the course of fight, appellant assaulted Manora Bibi, wife of Sk. Samsul, with a sabal on the head resulting in her death. Samsul and others were treated at Illambazar Primary Health Centre and thereafter at Bolpur Sadar Hospital. On the written complaint of Samsul, Illambazar Police Station Case No.83 dated 12.11.2007 under Sections 147/149/323/325/304/308 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against the appellant and seven others viz., Sk. Montu, Sk. Jhanai, Sk. Amirul, Sk. Ayas, Sk. Dukhlal, Mohana Bibi and Najma Bibi. In conclusion of investigation, charge sheet was filed in the instant case and case was committed to the Court of Sessions and transferred to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Bolpur, Birbhum for trial and disposal. Charges were framed under Sections 148, 326, 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 16 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. Defence of the accused persons was one of innocence and false implication. In conclusion of trial, trial judge by judgment and order darted 30.07.2014 and 31.07.2014 convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid. By the selfsame judgment and order, however, other accused persons were acquitted of the charges levelled against them.
4. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant argued that the prosecution case suffers from various inconsistencies and contradictions. Place of occurrence has not been proved. It was also argued that the manner and course of assault as narrated by ocular witnesses is not supported by post-mortem doctor, P.W 14. He accordingly prayed for acquittal.
5. On the other hand, Mr. Maity, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the evidence of the eye-witnesses unequivocally establishes the prosecution case that the appellant hit the victim on her head with a sabal. Intention of the appellant to murder the victim is clear. Ocular evidence of eyewitnesses is corroborated by the evidence of post-mortem doctor, P.W. 14. Hence, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.
6. P.W.1, Sk. Samsul, is the brother of the deceased. He is also the de facto complainant in the case. He deposed on the fateful day around 1:00 p.m. his brother Sk. Keramat (P.W. 6) asked Sk. Anarul and Sk. Ayes to remove the manure from his land. Over this issue the accused persons started assaulting Sk. Keramat (P.W. 6). He and his wife, Monara Bibi, his son Sk. Halim (P.W. 8) Unmesara Bibi, wife of Sk. Keramat (P.W. 9) rushed to the spot to save Sk. Keramat. They were assaulted by the accused persons. He along with Sk. Halim and Sk. Sarif (P.W. 2) were assaulted. Anarul hit his wife Monara Bibi with a sabol on her head. Complaint was scribed by Sk. Mojai as per his direction. He signed on the complaint. Police sent them to Illambazar hospital. He was released from the hospital. Others were treated at Sian hospital. Police held inquest ov
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
