Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Joymalya Bagchi, Bivas Pattanayak, JJ.
Sadhil Subba - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal - Respondent
C.R.A. 619 of 2011
Decided On : 15-03-2022
Dying Declaration - Murder - Section 302 IPC - The judgment discusses the reliability of the oral dying declaration of the deceased and the evidence of the sole eye-witness. The court concludes that the dying declarations are not reliable but the evidence of the eye-witness is convincing and corroborated by other evidence, leading to the conviction under Section 302 IPC.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted for the murder of the deceased, based on the prosecution's case that he assaulted the victim with a danda, resulting in severe injuries and death. The prosecution relied on oral dying declarations and the evidence of a sole eye-witness.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the oral dying declarations unreliable but considered the evidence of the sole eye-witness to be convincing and corroborated by other evidence, leading to the conviction of the appellant.
Issues: The issues revolved around the reliability of the oral dying declarations and the credibility of the sole eye-witness.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principle that the testimony of a single witness can be relied upon if it is convincing and corroborated by other evidence, and that delay in examining the witness during investigation does not affect credibility.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 302 IPC, with a set-off for the period of detention suffered by the appellant.
JUDGMENT
Joymalya Bagchi, J. - The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 29.09.2011 and 30.09.2011 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Darjeeling, in Sessions Trial No. 24/2007 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year more.
2. Prosecution case as alleged against the appellant is to the effect that on 02.03.2007 he had come in drunken condition to the house of one Roshan Tamang (P.W. 11) and demanded money for purchasing alcohol. Roshan refused to meet such unjust demand. At that time, Suroj Rai had also come to the residence of Roshan for inviting his son's birthday. Suroj intervened and asked the appellant to go away. Appellant became enraged and threatened Suroj that he would teach him a lesson.
3. Around 6:00 p.m. Suroj left the residence of Roshan and proceeded towards his house. At that juncture, appellant mercilessly assaulted Suroj with a danda resulting in severe injuries on his head and chest.
4. Appellant fell down at the spot and Suroj ran away. Incident was witnessed by Sapna Rai (P.W. 4) and while running away Suroj dashed against Chandrik Tamang (P.W. 2). Victim was initially shifted to a dispensary in the tea garden and thereafter to Darjeeling Sadar Hospital where he was examined by P.W. 17. Due to his precarious condition he was referred to North Bengal Medical College and Hospital. P.W. 1, father of the victim, lodged First Information Report resulting in registration of Darjeeling P.S. Case No. 30/2007 dated 03.03.2007 under section 326/307 I.P.C. against the appellant. He also shifted Suroj to Anandalok Nursing Home, Siliguri for better treatment. As there was no improvement in the condition of the victim, he was again re-admitted at Darjeeling Sadar Hospital on 06.03.2007 and expired on the next day, that is, 07.03.2007. Upon his death Section 302 I.P.C. was added to the First Information Report.
5. In course of investigation, appellant was arrested and charge- sheet was filed against him. Charge was framed under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant. Appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
6. In course of trial, prosecution examined 19 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. Defence of the appellant is one of innocence and false implication. It was his specific defence that he had been falsely implicated due to his allegiance to a different political party.
7. In conclusion of trial, the Trial Judge by the impugned judgment and order dated 29.09.2011 and 30.09.2011 convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid.
8. Prosecution case against the appellant is primarily hinged on the following:
(a) Oral dying declaration of the deceased.
(b) The evidence of sole eye witness P.W. 4 which is corroborated by P.W. 2 and 5.
Oral dying declaration by the deceased :
Prosecution has sought to prove the oral dying declaration of the deceased through the following witnesses:-
P.W.1, Ashok Rai is the father of the deceased and informant in this case. He was not present at the place of occurrence. He received information around 7.00 p.m. from his daughter-in-law Dipika Rai (P.W. 13). He went to Darjeeling District Hospital and found his son lying unconscious. He shifted his son to Anandalok Nursing Home, Siliguri.
9. But as his condition did not improve, he re-admitted his son at Darjeeling Sadar Hospital on 06.03.2007. Finally, on 07.03.2007 his son expired. He learnt from his daughter-in-law the appellant had assaulted his son. He lodged written complaint.
10. P.W. 13, Dipika Rai is the wife of the deceased. She deposed upon hearing the news that her husband was lying with bleeding injury at Beech Gaow, she came to the spot. She heard from one Sapna Rai that the appellant had assaulted her husband. She took Suroj to dispensary and from there to Darjeeling Sadar
The main legal point established is that the evidence of a sole eye-witness can be relied upon if it is convincing and corroborated by other evidence, even if the oral dying declarations are found to....
The need for circumstances to be fully established and consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, and the requirement for corroboration of an oral dying declaration by other ind....
The standard of proof in a criminal case demands evidence beyond reasonable doubt, and contradictions in witness testimonies undermine the prosecution's case.
Murder – Non-examination of Doctor who conducted autopsy on dead body of deceased and who prepared post-mortem report is not fatal to case of prosecution.
The judgment establishes the importance of dying declarations and the application of appropriate sections of the IPC based on the circumstances and intention of the accused.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the reliance on ocular evidence, admission of presence, and post-mortem report to establish the appellant's involvement in the assault, leading to ....
The court affirmed that intent to cause death or grievous injury is critical for conviction under Section 304(1) IPC, supported by consistent eyewitness accounts and medical evidence.
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
