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

1921 Supreme(Cal) 238

CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Teunon, J., Ghose, J.
Emperor - Appellant
Versus
Taribullah Shaikh & Ors. - Respondent
Decided On : 07-03-1921

The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for sufficient evidence to prove the guilt of the accused and the need for a fair and impartial presentation of evidence in trials.

Headnote:

Section 307 - Criminal Procedure - Sections 147, 302, 323, 148, Indian Penal Code - The judgment discusses the offenses punishable under Sections 147, 302, and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. It also refers to the offense punishable under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. The court analyzes the evidence and identifies misdirections in the learned Sessions Judge's charge to the Jury, highlighting the lack of evidence to support certain statements and the need for a dispassionate and impartial presentation of evidence.

Fact of the Case:

The case involves the murder of a Zemindar, Kumud Chandra Pathak, and the subsequent trial of nine accused persons charged with offenses under Sections 147, 302, and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. The Jury unanimously found three accused guilty, but the learned Sessions Judge was unable to accept the verdict and referred the case to the Court for consideration.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the evidence presented was not sufficient to conclusively prove the complicity of the accused in the crime, leading to the acquittal of six accused persons. The Court also identified misdirections in the learned Sessions Judge's charge to the Jury, highlighting the lack of evidence to support certain statements and the need for a dispassionate and impartial presentation of evidence.

Issues: The main issues revolved around the sufficiency of evidence to prove the guilt of the accused, the misdirections in the learned Sessions Judge's charge to the Jury, and the need for a fair and impartial presentation of evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court's decision was based on the insufficiency of evidence to prove the guilt of the accused and the identification of misdirections in the learned Sessions Judge's charge to the Jury, emphasizing the importance of a fair and impartial presentation of evidence in trials.

Final Decision: The Court acquitted six accused persons due to insufficient evidence and identified misdirections in the learned Sessions Judge's charge to the Jury. It also acquitted three accused persons proposed for conviction, stating that a retrial would serve no useful purpose.

JUDGMENT

Ghosh, J. - This is a reference tinder Section 307 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the learned. Sessions Judge of Pabna in a trial held by him, with the aid of a Jury, of nine persons named Taribulla, Korban, Rahimuddi, Mahajan Mondal, Hajrat Ali Sheikh, Badu Mondal, Maju Sheikh, Amir Munshi, and Rajab Sheikh, charged with offenses punishable under Sections 147, 302 and 323, Indian Penal Cede and of one of the said persons named Maju Sheikh also charged with an offense punishable u/s 148 of the Indian Penal Code. The Jury were unanimously of opinion that three of the accused, namely, Taribulla, Mahajan Mondal and Badu Mondal were guilty under Sections 147 and 323, read with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, but that the other accused persons were not guilty of any offense. The learned Sessions Judge, for the reasons stated by him in his letter of reference, was unable to accept the verdict of the Jury and has submitted the case for the consideration of this Court. In his opinion, all the accused persons were guilty not only of an offense u/s 147, but also of the graver offence punishable u/s 302, Indian Penal Code.

2. The case for the prosecution, shortly stated, was as follows:---One Kumud Chandra Pathak, a Zemindar of village Saratia, within the jurisdiction of the Serajgunj Police Station, in the District of Pabna, was murdered on the 25th May 1920, while returning home in the afternoon from Serajgunj, where he had gone on business. The murder took place at a spot near the village Saratia. The deceased lived in Shibnathpur, a village about a mile off from Saratia. Between him and some of his tenants in Saratia, including the present accused, there had been, for some time past, a great deal of litigation, civil and criminal. The feeling between the parties was apparently so high that the deceased, whenever he had occasion to go to Serajgunj, the way to which lay via Saratia, tarried a gun with him. On the 25th May he want to Serajganj in connection with some cases of his then pending in the Courts there against some of his Saratia tenants. He went in a four wheeled Baggy and was accompanied by his cyce, Korban, and an officer of his named Krishna Sander Nandi. He did not, however, on this occasion tarry his gun with him. The deceased, after transacting his business, left Serajganj in the afternoon to return home. His officer, Krishna Sunder, had to be left behind, because the cases for the day in which he had to give evidence had not than been taken up. The distance between Sibnathpur and Serajganj is about six miles, About four miles from Serajgunj, on the road to Sibnathpur, is a plate tailed Sealkhole Hat. At this place, the deceased picked up one Meher, a tenant of his, to escort him safe beyond Saratia. He then proceeded on his journey and, it is alleged, as soon as he reached the accused, Taribulla's house, one Mohernddi, who was standing near the entrance with a dao in his hand, hastily draw up, seized the reins and stopped the Buggy. Others came up and Kumud Chandra was at first struck with a bamboo. Be got down from the Baggy and tried to ran away. Bat his assailants overtook him and literally hacked him to pieces and after putting his dead body in the Buggy started the horse off. The present accused are alleged to have been among the men who attached and murdered Kamud Chandra Pathak and they were sent up for trial under the sections referred to above.

3. The first information of the occurrence was lodged at about 6 30 p. m., on the 25th May by one Hemanta Kumar Chakravorty, a neighbour and tenant of the deceased, at the Serajganj Police Station. Hemanta had been informed of the occurrence by Meher and beyond the fact that it was stated in the first information that the man of Saratia had attacked Kamud Chandra and murdered him,, no details were given and no names were mentioned. The investigation commenced on the same evening and it appears that the Sub Inspector, Abdul Kader Khan, retched the place of oc

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