IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.
Ram Chandra Das And Anr. – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of West Bengal - Respondent
CRA 501 of 2005, CRA 101 OF 2005
Decided On : 10-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of criminal case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments against conviction. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. observations on reasonable doubt. (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. discrepancies in evidence. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. criteria for sections 399/402 ipc. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. conclusion and order of appeal. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.
1. The instant criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the appellants against the judgment and order of conviction dated 25th January, 2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Court-2, Kalyani, Nadia whereby the order of conviction is passed under Sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years for the offence punishable under Section 399 of the Indian Penal Code and three years for the offence punishable under Section 402 of the Indian Penal Code.
Brief resume of the case
2. The genesis of this criminal case embedded on the strength of the complaint lodged by the S.I., Kalyani P.S. on 23rd January, 2004 before the O.C., Kalyani P.S. when he produced five accused persons, namely, (1) Ram Chandra Das (2) Raju Das @ Saha @ Susanta Saha @ Chaina (3) Paltu Sarkar (4) Abhijit Saha and (5) Bappa Das along with some deadly weapons. It was alleged that the complainant along with some other police persons on receiving information that some miscreants have assembled at Bijoynagar, a lonely place near Railway line (up & down main line) with deadly weapons to commit dacoity in a closed factory under Kalyani Industrial Estate ,rushed there at around 22.45 hrs. and reached near R.T.C. and left their vehicle and reached Bijoynagar on walking. They found some young men sitting in an isolated place and gossiping in a low voice and they rounded them and disclosed their identity and asked them to surrender before them then those said young men disclosed their identity as described hereinabove. After that, the complainant searched their persons and on search, recovered one iron chopper from the possession of Ram Chandra Das, one iron chopper from the possession of Raju Das @ Saha, one iron made Sidkati from the possession of Partha Sarkar, one iron rod about 3 ½” from the possession of Abhijit Saha and one iron rod about 3” from the possession of Bappa Das. Those persons failed to give any satisfactory explanation regarding possession of such weapons and also failed to give any appropriate reply regarding their presence on the spot at that point of time. It was further mentioned in the written complaint that on interrogation, those persons confessed their guilt and stated that they assembled there with weapons to commit dacoity in the locality and other places.
3. On the basis of such complaint, Kalyani P.S. Case No.19 dated 23rd January, 2004 under Sections 399 /402 I.P.C. started and after completion of investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted. The case was transferred on commitment before the learned District Judge, Nadia, subsequently, transferred to the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Tract, Court-2, Kalyani, Nadia for trial. The learned Court framed the charges under and 402 against all the accused persons and the content of the charge was read over and explained to them to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence, the trial commenced.
Submissions
4. The learned Advocate representing the appellant initially submitted that the learned Court passed the order of conviction without considering the discrepancies in the evidences adduced by the prosecution witnesses. It is his specific contention that the complaint was lodged on 23rd January, 2004 by the S.I., Kalyani P.S. and he seized offending weapons from each of the accused persons which were five in numbers. No independent witness was there who was present since it was dead at night. More so, no evidence can be found to establish any conspiracy to be by the accused persons.
The mere assembly of individuals with weapons does not suffice to establish intent or preparation for a dacoity under IPC Sections 399 and 402; the prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doub....
The court ruled that the failure of prosecution to corroborate witness testimonies and resolve inconsistencies led to the acquittal of the accused.
The judgment establishes the importance of the prosecution's obligation to establish a prima facie case and the burden of proof on the accused in cases involving offences under section 399 and sectio....
Insufficient evidence and procedural lapses can lead to the overturning of convictions for serious offenses, highlighting the necessity for rigorous proof in criminal trials.
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.