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

2025 Supreme(Cal) 624

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
RAJASEKHAR MANTHA, AJAY KUMAR GUPTA, JJ.
Maynul Bere @ Sk. Maynul & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of West Bengal – Respondent
C.R.A. 283 of 2015 With C.R.A. 266 of 2015 With C.R.A. 320 of 2015
Decided On : 18-08-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants :Mr. Sudipto Moitra, Senior Advocate, Mr. Angshuman Chakraborty, Mr. S.S. Saha, Mr. Sabir Ahmed, Mr. Dhiman Banerjee, Mr. T. Ahmed, Mr. Y.Z. Dastoor, Senior Advocate, Mr. Prabir Majumdar
For the State : Mr. Debasish Roy, Ld. Public Prosecutor, Mr. Soumik Ganguly, Ms. Madhumita Basak

The court reaffirmed that discrepancies in minor details do not undermine the credibility of eyewitnesses in violent crimes where the prosecution has established overwhelming evidence of guilt.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, Sections 302, 326, and 34 - Conviction for murder and grievous hurt - Appellants convicted of murdering Lalchand and causing grievous injuries to others with shared intent - Evidence supported by multiple eye-witness accounts and medical reports despite discrepancies - Delay in FIR and investigation deemed minor relative to overwhelming evidence. (Paras 1-89)

(B) Criminal Procedure - Investigative lapses - Delays in recording statements were explained and did not undermine prosecution's case - Evidence of injured witnesses deemed credible. (Paras 40-58)

Facts of the case:
The appellants, part of a larger group, were charged with the murder of Lalchand and the assault on his family after a land dispute escalated into violence on November 9, 2005, leading to Lalchand's death and injuries to several others.

Findings of Court:
The court upheld convictions based on direct witness testimony and medical evidence.

Issues: The main issues involved the reliability of witness testimonies, the significance of the absence of weapon recovery, and procedural lapses in investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the evidentiary weight of testimonies from injured witnesses, ruling that minor discrepancies and investigative delays did not negate the clear intent and actions of the accused.

Result: Appeals dismissed, convictions upheld.

JUDGMENT :

Rajasekhar Mantha, J.

1. The present appeals are directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 22nd April 2015 and 23rd April 2015 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (FTC-1), Krishnanagar, Nadia, in Sessions Trial No. 2 July (2008) arising out of Sessions Case No. 132(5) of 2007. The appellants, Maynul Bere, Latif Shaikh, Maisuddin Shaikh, Waser Sk @ Wacher Mayra, were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

2. The appellants Mosaref Sk @ Musa, Maisuddin Sk, Faisuddin Bere, Jahangir Sk, Mainul Bere, WasirSk @ Wacher Mayra, Latif Sk, Ismail Mallick, AtabSk, Tayeb Ali Sk and Nur Islam @ Icchu were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 years with fine, for offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the IPC.

THE PROSECUTION CASE

3. The prosecution case is that on the 9th November, 2005 at about 09:00 AM in a plot of agricultural land located at a place called “Banskata” Math (field), Haphijuddin Mallick (PW 4) (resident of Dingel Village, under Kaliaganj PS) saw that accused Tayeb Ali Sk was ploughing into the former’s land after breaking an ‘aile’ (a partition between two tracts of land made of mud in the form of a raised platform also used for walking). Upon being confronted by PW 4 and one Moijuddin, Tayeb Ali Sk. attacked PW 4 and hit him with a stick on his head. Tayeb thereafter left the place along with Faizuddin Bere, to Borobighe village (1 km away) under Nakashipara PS, and brought the accused persons, Maynul Bere, Latif Sk., Maijuddin Sk., Waser Sk, Mosaref, Faijuddin Bere, Jahangir Sk., Mainul Bere, Ismail Mallick, Atab Sk. and Nur Islam and several other persons altogether about 20-30 persons.

4. At the relevant point in time, Lalchand Mallick, Sabdullah Mallick and Burhan Ali, all sons of PW 4, were present in the field reaping paddy along with workers. The accused persons and their associates are stated to have come from Borobighe village along with a Ram Dao (a long, curved, sharp cutting instrument used in agriculture), Sticks, Tangi (another sharp cutting instrument used in agriculture) and other sharp cutting instruments and attacked Haphijuddin, his sons, Lalchand Mallick, Burhan Mullick and Sabdullah. Lalchand was stated to have been restrained by two persons, Moijuddin and Faijuddin (stated by PW 9) or Latif (stated by PW 2) or Latif and Moijuddin (stated by PW 10).

5. Maijuddin, Momin and Faijuddin, Maynul and Latif are stated to have inflicted injuries on Haphijuddin, Burhan and Sabdullah with a Ramdao and sticks. Maynul is stated to have struck Lalchand in the nape of the neck with a Ramdao, as deposed by PWs 2, 3, 4, 8, and 9.

6. Lalchand is stated to have died on the spot or on the way to the Saktinagar hospital and was declared dead or arrival at the hospital. Burhan Mallick suffered grievous injuries in the right infra-scapular region on the back with diaphragm injury of 10” x 2” in the chest cavity and abdomen, and was hospitalised for eleven days. Haphijuddin suffered an incised injury on the left scapula region, muscle deep and bone deep, 5” x ½”. The bed head ticket was exhibited. Haphijuddin Mallick suffered a fresh incised injury on the scalp, 1” x ¼” x ¼”, and another injury on the scalp of ½” x ¼” x ¼”. He was in the hospital for three days. Sabdullah Mallick suffered incised injuries on the scalp, 1” x ¼” and with severe low back pain. He was in the hospital for 2 days.

7. PW 8 Ajila Bibi, mother of the deceased; PW 9 Hawatan Bibi, sister of the deceased and PW 10 Abdul Samad Mallick, husband of PW 9, are stated to have reached the place of occurrence from their house after hearing about the incident. The house is located at a distance of 1 km from the PO. While PWs 8 and 9 claimed that they sustained injuries in the scuffle trying to save Haphijuddin, no injury reports or bed head tickets of their treatment were produced in the trial.

8. After the incide

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
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top