Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Chitta Ranjan Dash, Partha Sarathi Sen, JJ.
Unush Mondal - Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 72 of 2006, IA No: CRAN 1 of 2006, 4 of 2008, 5 of 2010 (Old No. CRAN 450 of 2006, 2440 of 2008, 2044 of 2010))
Decided On : 18-01-2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL - MURDER - FACTUAL MATRIX - EYE WITNESSES - SECTION 145 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT - SECTION 162 OF CRPC - MATERIAL CONTRADICTIONS - BENEFIT OF DOUBT - CONVICTION SET ASIDE - SECTION 302 IPC - FACTUAL MATRIX - EYE WITNESSES - SECTION 145 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT - SECTION 162 OF CRPC - MATERIAL CONTRADICTIONS - BENEFIT OF DOUBT - CONVICTION SET ASIDE - SECTION 302 IPC
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted by the trial court for the murder of Abu Jamal Sk. The prosecution alleged that the appellant and other assailants chased the victim into a mosque, assaulted him, and dragged him outside where they chopped him to death with sharp weapons. The appellant denied the charges and claimed false implication.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the testimony of the prosecution witnesses was full of contradictions and inconsistencies. The witnesses had not mentioned the names of the assailants or their role in the crime to the investigating officer, but they had stated these facts for the first time in their testimony before the court. The court held that these omissions amounted to material contradictions that affected the veracity and credibility of the witnesses.
Issues: 1. Whether the testimony of the prosecution witnesses was reliable and trustworthy. 2. Whether the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the omissions on the part of the prosecution witnesses to mention the names of the assailants and/or their role in the commission of crime before the I.O. tantamounts to material and significant contradictions which are definitely affecting the veracity and credibility of the said eye witnesses.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant, and directed his release from custody.
JUDGMENT
Partha Sarathi Sen, J. - The instant appeal arises out of the judgement and order of conviction dated 23.12.2005, as passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Krishnanagar, Nadia, in Sessions Trial No.III of June 2003, arising out of Sessions Case no.37(12)/01 whereby and whereunder the present appellant was convicted by the said trial court under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and thus sentenced to suffer R.I for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- i.d to suffer further R.I for six months for the commission of the offence of murder.
2. The appellant felt aggrieved and thus preferred the instant appeal.
3. For effective adjudication of the instant appeal, the facts leading to initiation of the aforesaid Sessions trial is narrated hereinbelow in short.
4. One Abdul Sk. of Village Sahebnagar, P.S Nabadwip lodged a written complaint dated 30.05.2001 with the I.C. Nabadwip P.S stating, inter alia, that his second son Abu Jamal had to reside at his in-laws' home on account of previous enmity with some of the villagers of the self same village. It has been reported by him that on the previous night the said miscreants were of impression that his second son Abu Zamal had come to village Sahebnagar and on account of such perception, they started hurling bombs at about 10 p.m as a result whereof four villagers suffered slight injuries. After getting the information of such hurling of bombs, the informant's second son Abu Jamal came to Village Sahebnagar and at that time with the leadership of Musa Mondal, Horshed Mondal and Iskender Mondal some miscreants namely; Yunus Mondal armed with Ram dao, Tajem Sk. armed with musket, Taimuj Sk. armed with musket, Nazrul Mondal armed with musket , Sahajan Sk. armed with bomb, Pantosh Sk. armed with dao, Sakabat Sk. armed with bomb, Daud Mondal armed with ram dao, Mainuddin Mondal armed with ramdao, Ershed Mondal armed with ramdao,Choto Mondal armed with bomb,Jubbbar Mondal armed with musket, Ichhaque Mondal armed with musket, Jikir Mondal armed with musket, Attr Mondal armed with fala , Onimuddin Mondal and Boga Mondal armed with bomb, Kalo Mondal, taib Mondal, Asker Mondal and Anur Momdal armed with bomd, Sanur Mondal armed with bomb, Asraf Mondal, Jiarul Mondal armed with bomb, Morshed Mondal, Masad Mondal, Jagir Mondal , Jiyar Mondal, Soifikul Mondal, Ardin Mondal and many others started hurling bombs and chased his said son. It is the further version of the informant that in order to save his life his said son Abu Jamal took shelter in a mosque and at that time Yeeahoo Sk., Hyder Ali Sk., Alem Ali Sk. Abunachar Sk. Faijul Sk, Ohadali Sk. Taju Mondal, Asimuddin Sk. , Rahaman Sk. , Monjur Ali Sk. Chattar Sk. and many others reached at the said mosque to save his son and at that time he noticed that one Daud Mondal assaulted one Jamin Sk. by a sharp cutting weapon and Jubbar Mondal, Tajem Sk, Taimuj Sk. and Najrul Mondal fired towards his said son. It is the further version of the de facto complainant that one Choto Mondal and Murshed Mondal also hurled bomb towards the informant as well as at his associates and at that time his said son was dragged outside the gate of the said mosque by Ershed Mondal and Mainuddin Mondal where the accused Unush Mondal, Daud Mondal , Mainuddin and Ershed started assaulting his said son by using Ram dao and as a result of such severe injuries his said son at about 7 a.m died at the spot and thereafter the said accused persons fled away after hurling bombs.
5. On the basis of such written complaint Nabadwip P.S case No.52/2001 dated 30.05.2001 under Sections 147/148/149/326/302/427/341 IPC and 9(b) I.E Act, 3/4 E.S Act 1908 and under Sections 25/27 Arms Act was started.
6. Investigation was taken up and on completion of the same charge sheet under Sections 147/148/149/325/326/427/302/34 IPC, 9(b) of the Indian Explosive Act and 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act was submitted against 26 accused persons including the present appellan
Omissions in the statements of prosecution witnesses to the investigating officer, which are significant and relevant to the case, can amount to material contradictions that affect the credibility of....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for reliability and consistency in witness testimonies and evidence presented by the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doub....
Prosecution must substantiate charges with reliable evidence; significant discrepancies in witness statements and medical evidence warrant acquittal.
The prosecution failed to prove the charges of murder and unlawful assembly beyond reasonable doubt due to unreliable witness testimonies and lack of corroborative evidence.
Once prosecution has brought home evidence of presence of accused at scene of crime, then onus stood shifted on defence to explain as to what had brought them to place of occurrence.
Criminal Law – Offence of Murder – Testimony of eye-witnesses – Admissibility of - Testimony of eye-witnesses, we find that one Appellant 2 was identified as a member of the unlawful assembly who had....
Conviction for homicide upheld based on credible eyewitness testimony; acquitted parties lacked sufficient evidence of participation in crime.
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
