SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Cal) 304

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Joymalya Bagchi, Ajay Kumar Gupta, JJ.
Samad Sk. & Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
The State of West Bengal - Respondent
C.R.A. 287 of 2015
Decided On : 01-05-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Arnab Chatterjee, Adv. Ms. Dhanasree Biswas, Adv. Ms. Poulami Bose, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Saswata Gopal Mukherjee .. ld. P.P. Mr. Parthapratim Das, Adv. Ms. Eshita Dutta, Adv.

Headnote:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 120B, 34 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 161, 164 – Offence of Murder – Appeal against judgment - Criminal Conspiracy - Held, Court view it is inadvisable to rely on oral version regard to nature of conversation made in course of aforesaid phone calls - Appellants are related to one another and a couple of phone calls between them cannot by itself form foundation of conspiracy between others to commit murder - Court inclined to extend benefit – Appeal allowed.

JUDGMENT :

Joymalya Bagchi, J.

1. Appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 17.03.2015 and 18.03.2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Krishnagar, Nadia in Sessions Case No. 60(9) of 2012 arising out of Sessions Trial No. I(X) of 2012 convicting appellant nos.1 to 5 for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-each, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months more and convicting appellant no.6 for commission of offence punishable under Sections 302/120B of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months more.

2. Prosecution case as alleged against the appellant is as follows:-

On 16.04.2004 Nilufa Biswas was married to Kamaluddin Sk., appellant no.6 herein. After the marriage, she was subjected to torture and took refuge at her parental home. A village salishi was held. She was sent back to her matrimonial home. Nilufa gave birth to a female child. Thereafter, torture increased upon her. She again returned to her parental home. Kamaluddin was employed in the Indian Army. As he was neglecting his wife and child, Nilufa wrote a letter to the army authorities claiming maintenance. As a result, a sum of Rs.3500/-per month was deducted from Kamaluddin’s salary. Six months prior to the incident, Kamaluddin returned home and pursuant to a salishi brought Nilufa to her matrimonial home. He demanded Nilufa refund the maintenance paid to her. Nilufa refused and a quarrel ensued. Subsequently, Kamaluddin left for his unit. On 03.05.2012 around 1:00 A.M. Samad Sk. (elder brother-in-law of Nilufa) and her mother-in-law viz. Rachula Bewa @ Rosula Bibi set Nilufa on fire upon instruction of Kamaluddin and other in-laws i.e. Manowara Bibi @ Manoara Khan (sister-in-law), Felu Khan @ Rohim Buxo Khan (cousin brother-in-law) and Asan Sk (uncle-in-law). Nilufa was initially admitted to the district hospital and thereafter to NRS Medical College & Hospital. While she was fighting for life, Sirajuddin Biswas (PW1) lodged written complaint at Chapra police station resulting in Chapra Police Station Case No. 193 of 2012 dated 03.05.2012 under Sections 326/498A/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. From NRS Medical College & Hospital, Nilufa was shifted to Command Hospital, Kolkata by Kamaluddin. There she breathed her last on 14.05.2012. Section 302 IPC was added.

3. In conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against Kamaluddin and the other in-laws.

4. Charges were framed against the in-laws viz. Samad Sk. (cousin brother-in-law), Rachula Bewa @ Rosula Bibi (mother-in-law), Manowara Bibi @ Manoara Khan (sister-in-law), Felu Khan @ Rohim Buxo Khan (brother-in-law) and Asan Sk (uncle-in-law) under Sections 302/34 IPC and against Kamaluddin Sk. under Sections 302/120B IPC. Appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. In course of trial, prosecution examined 20 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. Defence of the appellants was one of innocence and false implication.

6. In conclusion of trial, learned trial Judge by the impugned judgment and order dated 17.03.2015 and 18.03.2015 convicted and sentenced the appellants, as aforesaid.

7. During pendency of the appeal, Rachula Bewa @ Rosula Bibi, appellant no.2 herein expired. Hence, the appeal abated so far as the said appellant is concerned.

8. Mr. Arnab Chatterjee for the appellants submits prosecution case suffers from gross contradictions and improbabilities. Dying declarations recorded by PW14 at Shaktinagar Hospital (Ext.15) as well as at NRS Medical College & Hospital (Ext.23) do not disclose the role of appellant nos.3, 4 & 5 in the murder. Oral dying declaration made to PWs.3 to 7 at the place o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top