The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the absence of independent witnesses and reliance on biased testimony led to the acquittal being upheld.

1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 9th February, 1988 passed by Shri S. P. Dutt, learned Sessions Judge, Burdwan acquitting the respondents of the charges under S.148/149/302 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Trial Case No.13 of 1987.

2. Prosecution case as levelled against the respondents is to the effect that on 31st December, 1985, one Sasthi Charan Ruidas lodged a complaint with the Officer - in - Charge of Raina Police Station alleging that on returning from police station, he found his wife, Kalpana Ruidas, the victim, hanging dead in the east facing room of his house and on query, his mother, Smt. Durga Bala Dasi, P.W.2, intimated him that at about 9 to 9-30 a.m., the respondents, being armed, had assaulted his wife. Upon protest, his mother (PW2) was also assaulted. P.W.2 further intimated his son that on being assaulted, his wife committed suicide. Subsequently, he found the victim was hanging from the eastern side room, as aforesaid.

3. Pursuant to investigation, charge - sheet was filed under S.148/149/302 of the Indian Penal Code against the respondents, who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Nine witnesses were examined during the trial and a number of documents were examined.

4. The specific defence of the respondents was that there was enmity between the defacto complainant, Sasthi Charan Ruidas and the deceased, Mongal Kora over the issue of an illicit relation between the defacto complainant's wife, Kalpana Ruidas and the said Mongal Kora. It was their further defence that over such dispute, the defacto complainant and his mother subjected Kalpana to physical assault and consequently, the victim had died. In order to cover their misdeeds, the defacto complainant and his mother had filed the instant case implicating the respondents, who are the relations of the aforesaid Mongal Kora.

5. Upon considering the evidence and / or the materials on record, the trial Judge acquitted the respondents of the charges levelled against them.

6. Mr. Saryati Datta, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant State, submitted that the trial Judge had failed to appreciate the evidence of P.W.2 and P.W.4, who are eyewitnesses of the incident. Their ocular evidence is corroborated by the autopsy surgeon who found 26 injuries on the person of the victim and notwithstanding such incriminating evidence, the order of acquittal was passed.

7. Let us examine the aforesaid submissions in the light of the evidence on record.

8. P.W.1, Sasthi Charan Ruidas, is the defacto complainant and the husband of the deceased. He stated that on the date of the incident, he had gone to Raina Police Station to lodge a complaint against one Mongal Kora, who had come to his house in a suspicious manner few days ago at night. He had caught him and reported the matter to Gopal Ruidas, a Panchayat member. He had called for an arbitration over the matter. Mongal and his parties had threatened him with dire consequences for lodging complaint with the village Panchayat members. On the date of occurrence at about 2 to 2-30 p.m., he found his mother weeping and his wife was hanging in the room. On query, his mother stated that the respondents had entered the house, being variously armed, and had assaulted his wife as well as his mother. As a consequence, his mother fled away. On her return after some time, she found the door was bolted from outside and after entering the room by removing the bolt, she found that the victim, Kalpana, was hanging inside with a rope round the neck. She had identified all the accused persons.

9. It, therefore, appears that P.W.1 is a reported witness and admitted