Back
2022 Supreme(Cal) 583
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Debangsu Basak, Bibhas Ranjan De, JJ.
Bablu Pal And Others - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal - Respondent
C.R.A 231 of 2009
Decided On : 07-07-2022
Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharya, Ms. Sukla Das Chandra, Ms. Swarnali Saha, for the Appellant; Mr. Sumanta Ganguly as Amicus Curiae, Mr. Aniruddha Bhattacharya, Ms. Anasuya Sinha, Mr. Pinak Kumar Mitra, for the Respondent
The court held that the prosecution had established a chain of circumstances that proved the appellants' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, that the appellants' confessional statements were admissible as evidence, and that the trial court erred in not imposing separate sentences for each offense.
Headnote:
The court upheld the conviction of five appellants for abduction for ransom, murder, and concealing evidence in the case of Dr. Jayanta Ghosh's murder. The court found that the prosecution had established a chain of circumstances that proved the appellants' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, including witness testimony, phone records, and the recovery of the murder weapon and the victim's belongings. The court also found that the appellants' confessional statements were admissible as evidence and corroborated the other evidence against them. The court rejected the appellants' arguments that the investigation was defective and that the trial court erred in not imposing separate sentences for each offense. The court sentenced the appellants to life imprisonment for murder and seven years' rigorous imprisonment for abduction for ransom, with the sentences to run concurrently.
Fact of the Case:
Dr. Jayanta Ghosh, a practicing doctor, went missing from his chamber on March 6, 2006. His wife received a phone call from an unknown person demanding ransom for his release. The next day, Dr. Ghosh's body was found with a cut throat near a river. The police arrested five suspects, who confessed to the crime and led the police to the murder weapon and the victim's belongings. The trial court convicted the appellants of abduction for ransom, murder, and concealing evidence and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution had established a chain of circumstances that proved the appellants' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This included witness testimony that placed the appellants with the victim shortly before his disappearance, phone records that showed the appellants had made calls to the victim's wife demanding ransom, and the recovery of the murder weapon and the victim's belongings from the appellants' possession. The court also found that the appellants' confessional statements were admissible as evidence and corroborated the other evidence against them.
Issues: 1. Whether the prosecution had established a chain of circumstances that proved the appellants' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 2. Whether the appellants' confessional statements were admissible as evidence. 3. Whether the trial court erred in not imposing separate sentences for each offense.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court found that the prosecution had established a chain of circumstances that proved the appellants' guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This included witness testimony that placed the appellants with the victim shortly before his disappearance, phone records that showed the appellants had made calls to the victim's wife demanding ransom, and the recovery of the murder weapon and the victim's belongings from the appellants' possession. 2. The court found that the appellants' confessional statements were admissible as evidence and corroborated the other evidence against them. The court noted that the statements were made voluntarily and after the appellants had been informed of their rights. 3. The court found that the trial court erred in not imposing separate sentences for each offense. The court held that Section 31 of the Criminal Procedure Code requires the court to impose separate sentences for each offense for which a defendant is convicted at one trial.
Final Decision: The court upheld the conviction of the appellants for abduction for ransom, murder, and concealing evidence. The court sentenced the appellants to life imprisonment for murder and seven years' rigorous imprisonment for abduction for ransom, with the sentences to run concurrently.
JUDGMENT
Bibhas Ranjan De, J. - Background:
1. Dr. Jayanta Kumar Ghosh (since deceased) being resident of GD-322, Sec-3, Salt Lake, Kolkata-6, was a practicing Doctor in a room of Mosjid Building at 23/2 Raja Moninda Road, Belgachia, Kolkata-37.
2. On 06.03.2006 Dr. Jayanta Ghosh went to his chamber at about 10.00 a.m. At about 3.45 to 4.00 p.m. his wife received one call at her residence in their telephone with CLI facilities. She was informed that Dr. Jayanta Ghosh would return late and the said caller number shown in CLI as 033- 55186437 which was known to be a number of telephone booth at Kalyani,which she verified by making a call back to that number. However, Jayanta Ghosh was found missing from then on.
3. The matter was informed to Tala Police Station under GDE no. 409 dated 06.03.2006 at 5.10 P.M.
4. On the next day that is on 07.03.2006 at about 9.30 A.M. wife of Dr. Jayanta Ghosh again received a phone call from an unknown person claiming himself as custodian of Dr. Jayanta Ghosh and demanded Rs. 4 lac. The fact was immediately informed to Tala Police Station. Deputy Commissioner of Police (North) came to the residence of Dr. Jayanta Ghosh for inquiry.
5. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track (1st Court) Kandi, in the District of Murshidabad while disposing of the Sessions Case No. 75 of 2006 convicted Bablu Pal, Jaganath Naskar @ Jaga @ Jagu, Raju Misra, Swapan Kahar and Somnath Mistri under Section 364A/302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and finally, passed an order of sentence to imprisonment for life under Section 302 IPC and imposing no separate sentence under Section 364A/201 IPC in view of substantive sentence for the major offence under Section 302 IPC.
6. The Sessions Case No. 75 of 2006 arose out of a written complaint filed by one Poltu Khan (P.W.18) Son of Ajfar Hossain Khan, village Chaitpur under Police Station Burwan, District Murshidabad. Poltu Khan lodged the FIR on 7th March, 2006 contending inter alia that on 07.03.2006 at about 4.20 a.m. he came to know about one unknown person aged about 45 years lying injured on 'Maliyandi Bandh'. He rushed to the spot and saw the injured person lying with cut throat injury. Nobody could indentify that person. Injured was taken to Burwan Hospital where doctor declared him dead.
7. On receipt of the written complaint Burwan Police Station Case No. 29/06 dated 07.08.2006 under Section 302/34 IPC was started against unknown miscreants and S.I. of Police, Subrata Sarkar (P.W. 51) took up investigation of this case after preparing formal FIR. Investigating Officer (for short I.O) visited the place where the body was reported to have been found lying with cut throat injury. I.O seized one black colour spectacle with black film glass, one pair chappal, one paper with a phone Number and one red colour nylon rope, under a seizure list in presence of witnesses. Inquest report was prepared at Burwan Hospital. Post Mortem was held by Dr. Bidyut Mondal (P.W.46) attached to Kandi Sub Divisional Hospital. I.O seized the wearing apparels of dead body and one wrist watch under a seizure list.
8. Aninda Ghosh, son of Dr. Jayanta Kumar Ghosh (P.W.7) went to Burwan Police Station on 07.03.2006 at night and on the next day he went to Kandhi Hospital and identified the dead body of his father i.e Dr. Jayanta Ghosh and received the dead body after complying all the formalities therefor.
9. On 08.03.2006 C.I.D West Bengal took up the investigation of this case. Gouri Sankar Kanjilal, Inspector of Police (P.W. 54) attached to C.I.D West Bengal as Officer-In-charge Homicide took up investigation of this case by the order of Deputy Inspector General on 08.03.2006. He visited chamber of Dr. Jayanta Ghosh and examined Tarun Sarkar, Rofik Khan, Smt. Madhumita Das and Swarup Hati and came to know that on 06.03.2006 at about 13/14 hours two persons came to the doctor's chamber and requested him to attain one emergency call. One of them was wearing orange colour T-shirt.
10. Mr
