Back
2024 Supreme(Cal) 640
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY, SUGATO MAJUMDAR, JJ.
In Re.: Chimu Sarder @ Chimu Sardar & Ors. - Appellants
CRA No. 114 of 2020, CRAN No. 1 of 2020 (Old No. CRAN 935 of 2020), IA No. CRAN 2 of 2021 With CRA 369 of 2009 With CRA 520 of 2012, IA No. CRAN 1 of 2012 (Old No. CRAN 2867 of 2012)
Decided On : 03-01-2024
For the Appellant : Mr. Sumanta Chakraborty, Mr. Sudipto Moitra, Mr. Kallol Mondal, Mr. Krishan Ray, Mr. Souvik Das, Ms. Anamitra Banerjee, Mr. Dwaipayan Biswas.
For the State : Mr. Swapan Banerjee, Mr. Suman De.
The judgment emphasizes the admissibility of confessional statements, identification in test identification parade, and dock identification as substantial evidence in criminal trials.
Headnote:
Indian Penal Code - Conviction under Sections 395, 396, and 376 - Summary of Acts and Sections: IPC Sections 395, 396, 376, 354, 120B, 25/27 of Arms Act - The judgment discusses the prosecution's ability to prove the dacoity incident, identification of accused, confessional statements, and medical evidence. The court considered the involvement of more than five persons in the dacoity incident and upheld the conviction based on confessional statements, identification in test identification parade, and dock identification.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution case involved a dacoity incident where the accused snatched cash, ornaments, and valuables from passengers of buses and committed rape. The trial court convicted the accused under various sections of the IPC and Arms Act based on the prosecution's evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the involvement of more than five persons in the dacoity incident, upheld the confessional statements, and considered the identification in test identification parade and dock identification as substantial evidence against the accused.
Issues: The issues revolved around the prosecution's ability to prove the dacoity incident, identification of accused, confessional statements, and medical evidence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the confessional statements, identification in test identification parade, and dock identification to establish the guilt of the accused. It also considered the involvement of more than five persons in the dacoity incident as per the evidence on record.
Final Decision: The criminal appeals and connected applications were dismissed, upholding the findings of the trial court. The lower court records were ordered to be sent down to the learned Court below.
JUDGMENT :
Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.
1. The criminal appeal being C.R.A. 369 of 2009 has been preferred by Kurban Ali Mondal (in short, Kurban) and by Lodhai Sardar (in short, Lodhai) challenging the judgment dated 31st March, 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Ranaghat, Nadia in Sessions Case No.68(8) of 2003 [ST No.5(9) of 2003] whereby Kurban has been convicted under Sections 395 and 396 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC) and Lodhai has been convicted under Sections 395, 396 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC).
2. The criminal appeal being C.R.A. 114 of 2020 has been preferred by Chimu Sardar (in short, Chimu) challenging the same judgment dated 31st March, 2009 whereby he has been convicted under Sections 395 and 396 of IPC.
3. As in all the appeals, the judgment dated 31st March, 2009 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Ranaghat, Nadia in Sessions Case No.68(8) of 2003 [ST No.5(9) of 2003] is under challenge, the same have been taken up for analogous hearing.
4. The prosecution case is that on 6th February, 2003 at about 6.20 hrs one written complaint of one Dilip Ghosh of Aishmali within P.S. Dhantola was received. In the same, the complainant stated inter alia that on 6th February, 2003 he was working in the bus No.WB-51 2658 (hereinafter referred to as the first bus) as helper of the driver. On 5th February, 2003 he went to Birnagar Amdanga within P.S. Ranaghat from village Kuchiamora within P.S. Gopalnagar with bridal party. He started for return journey to Kuchiamora village at about 00.00hrs/00.15 hrs. At about 01.20 hrs the bus reached at Aishmali near Madrasha Ibrahimia Darul Ulam but could not proceed further since bricks were stacked on the road. Immediately thereafter some armed miscreants boarded the bus and snatched away cash, watches, gold ornaments, finger rings from him and from the other passengers of the bus. When they tried to snatch away money from Samir Ghosh @ Banka Ghosh, the driver, he had an altercation and the miscreants opened fire and he died on the spot. In the meantime another bus being No.WB-51/2733 (hereinafter referred to as the second bus) arrived at the spot with a bridal party and miscreants also looted the ornaments, watches, camera, V.C.P., cassette from the passengers of the said bus.
5. On the basis of the said written complaint Dhantola P.S. Case No.32 of 2003 dated 6th February, 2003 under Section 396 of IPC and 25/27 of Arms Act was registered and upon completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted under Sections 396/412/376/354/120B of IPC and 25/27 of the Arms Act against Subal Bagchi and 19 others on 3rd May, 2003. Subsequent thereto, on 16th August, 2003 a supplementary charge sheet was submitted before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate and the case was committed to the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Nadia. In the midst thereof, a supplementary charge sheet was submitted before the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate against five accused persons and the Court forwarded accused Kurban and one Yasin Biswas to the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Nadia. The case was, thereafter, transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Fast Track Court, Ranaghat.
6. The prosecution examined 138 witnesses during trial which included the complainant (PW-1), namely, Dilip Ghosh (in short, Dilip). In course of trial, Kurban submitted judicial confession under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code (in short, the Code) which was recorded by a learned Magistrate, who deposed as PW-130. The statement of Kurban was marked as Ext.-172. Kurban, however, subsequently retracted his judicial confession. PW-59, one of the women victims, identified two miscreants in the test identification parade (in short, TI parade), one who scuffled her and one who committed rape upon her. She also identified Lodhai in Court as the person, who had committed rape and one Pute Sarder @ S
