JUDGMENT :

Rajasekhar Mantha, J.

1. The subject appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 31st May, 2016, passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, F.T.C. Bankura in Sessions Trial No. 01(01)/2013 arising out of the Sessions Case No. 01(11)2012. The appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the IPC and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. He was also convicted to suffer imprisonment for one year for commission of offence punishable under Section 201 of the IPC. The sentence was directed to run concurrently.

THE PROSECUTION CASE, EVIDENCE ON RECORD AND THE ANALYSIS OF THIS COURT

2. An unidentified dead body with a palm severed in a decomposed condition was discovered by local residents in the Damodar river at Balighat under Mouza- Krishnanagar under Barjora PS sometime at about 1.00 p.m. on 27th June, 2012.

3. Upon being informed, the Barjora PS personnel, removed the dead body therefrom and sent the same for inquest. PW 15 was the Inquest Officer as well as the Investigating Officer of the case. The inquest report recorded several injuries on the body of the victim including the left palm being severed from the dead body. Sharp injures were also found on the right wrist of the victim. The victim had several cuts in both the upper and lower portion of his body. The inquest report indicated that the name “MANIK” was tattooed on the left forearm.

4. PW 5 was one of the local residents. He discovered the body of the victim. He wrote the formal written complaint to the Barjora PS. The FIR being No. 70/12 dated 27th June, 2012 was registered based on the said complaint at about 2.05 p.m on 27th June, 2012.

5. Meanwhile, the parents of the victim, PW 7 (mother) and PW 8 (father), were searching for their son. The said son left the house in the evening at 5:30 pm, on the 25th, 2012 and had not come back. PW 8 is stated to have lodged a missing diary with the Durgapur, Cokoven PS in that regard. PW 7 and 8 later received information from Barjora PS that two dead bodies have been recovered and reached thereat.

6. PW 7 gave the description of the wearing apparel of her son to the police personnel of the Barjora PS. The said wearing apparels worn by her son when he left the house on June 25th, 2012. PW 7 further informed the said PS that the left hand of her son had a tattoo imprinted with his name “Manik”. The said PS showed PW 7 photographs of the dead bodies recovered. PW 7 identified one of such bodies as that of her son Manik, from the said photographs. She along with her husband on being directed by the Cokeoven PS had gone to make enquiries about her son from his friends and had met CW-2 Mrinmoy Mondal @ Babushona at his house. She deposed that she had informed the police that Babushona had informed her that he had seen the accused and the victim on the night of the 25th together on a motorcycle at 8:30 PM.

7. Investigation was completed and charge sheet was submitted. Charges were framed under section 302 and Section 202 of the IPC. Babushona who should have been the star witness of the prosecution ought have been cited as a witness in the charge sheet. He was not so cited.

8. The case of the prosecution was based on circumstantial evidence. The main witnesses for the prosecution were PW-7, Monika Barui, mother of the victim, PW-8, Monoranjan Barui, father of the victim and PW-11, Sanjoy Some, maternal uncle of the victim. The consistent evidence of PW-7, PW-8 and PW-11 is that the victim left his house in the evening around 5.30 p.m. on 25th June, 2012 on a motorcycle. PW-7, however, stated that he left the house on 26th June, 2012. The victim was 18 years of old at that time. He used to normally return home by 9.30 p.m. but did do so on the said date. On being advised by Cokeoven PS they are stated to have gone to the house of the CW-2, one Mrinmoy Mondal @ Babusona. CW 2 was one friend of the victim.

9. PW 7 has deposed that C.