IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CIRCUIT BENCH JALPAIGURI
JOYMALYA BAGCHI, SUBHENDU SAMANTA, JJ.
The State of West Bengal – Appellant
Versus
Sahadeb Barman and Others – Respondents
Death Reference No. 1 of 2019, C.R.A. No. 12 of 2019 (CRAN No. 1 of 2020)
Decided On : 10-03-2023
Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 392, 411, 302, 109, 34 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 428 – Offence of murder – Appeal against conviction – Death sentence – Identification parade - Held, Court is inclined to commute death sentences imposed on appellants and direct that they shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for life without remission for a period of thirty years and to pay a fine each, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years more for offence punishable under section 302 IPC and shall suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years and pay a fine each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years more for offence punishable under section 392 IPC – Both sentences shall run concurrently – Disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
JOYMALYA BAGCHI, J.
1. Death reference and criminal appeal have arisen out of the judgment and order dated 25.06.2019 and 29.06.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Siliguri, Darjeeling in Sessions Case No. 01(01) of 2016 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 08 of 2016 convicting the appellants for commission of offence punishable under sections 302/392/411 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to death.
Prosecution Case:
2. Prosecution case levelled against the appellants is as follows:
3. In the course of investigation, it came to light that a Micromax mobile set belonging to Prasenjit and two mobile sets, i.e. a Samsung mobile set with touch screen and a Samsung mobile set with keypad belonging to Pradip had been stolen. Almirah in the house had been broken and gold ornaments and cash were missing. Investigating officer, Nitesh Lama (PW-28) tracked the SIM cards of Pradip Bardhan and Prasenjit Bardhan. SIM card numbers of Pradip were 9232693297 and 9932902053 (which was used by Dipti). SIM card number of Prasenjit was 8145186839.
4. In the course of investigation, investigation officer (PW-28) tracked the International Mobile Equipment Identity number (“IMEI” for short) of the hand sets in which the aforesaid SIM cards had been used. He noted that the SIM card of Pradip Bardhan i.e. 9232693297 was used in the mobile hand set bearing IMEI No. 355681050920873 (shown as IMEI No. 355681050920870 in CDRs). Another SIM card bearing No. 8159929187 was also used in the said handset on 14.09.2015 at 22:47:54 hours. The subsequent SIM card was registered in the name of one Sahadeb Barman of Tarijot. It may be pertinent to note one of the stolen mobile phones of Pradip Bardhan bore IMEI No. 355681050920873.
5. On 17.09.2015, PW-28 conducted raid in the residence of Sahadeb Barman. He recovered three mobile phones as follows:
(ii) 01 (one) Hitech Mobile phone having IMEI No. 911402250241383 and 911402250241391 with battery and one SIM card of Airtel having No. 8159929187.
(iii) 01 (one) Hitech Mobile phone (X-105) having IMEI Nos. 911342000623847 and 9113420001126345 with battery and a SIM card of Vodafone company.
6. Thereafter, raid was held in the house of Dipu Sutradhar. He recovered the following mobile phones:
Anjan Kumar Sharma and Others vs. State of Assam
Baiju alias Bharosa vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Brajendrasingh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab
Dana Yadav alias Dahu and Others vs. State of Bihar
George and Others vs. State of Kerala and Another
Gudda vs. State of M.P. (2013) 16 SCC 596
Hatti Singh vs. State of Haryana
Kanti Lal vs. State of Rajasthan
Limbaji and Other vs. State of Maharashtra
Mohan Lal and Another vs. Ajit Singh and Another
Mustkeem @ Sirajuddin vs. State of Rajasthan
Machhi Singh vs. State of Punjab
Ram Pal vs. State of U.P. (2003) 7 SCC 141
Swamy Shraddananda vs. State of Karnataka
State of Rajathan vs. Talevar And Another
The necessity for the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt in cases relying on circumstantial evidence, and the importance of establishing a clear connection between the accused and the....
The judgment emphasizes the requirement for a complete chain of evidence in cases based on circumstantial evidence, the inadmissibility of confessions, and the need to connect recovered material obje....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.