IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE PRESENT:

The Hon’ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj And The Hon’ble Justice Apurba Sinha Ray C.R.A. 387 of 2018 Ram Mandal -Vs-

The State of West Bengal For the Appellant : Mr. Kusal Kumar Mukherjee Mr. Diptangshu Basu For the State : Mr. Arijit Ganguly Ms. Trisha Rakshit Reserved On : 29.04.2025 Pronounced On : 14.08.2025 Rajarshi Bharadwaj, J.

1. The appeal is directed against the judgement and an order passed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court at Malda, dated May18, 2018 in Sessions Case No. 153 of 2015, convicting the appellant under Sections 302of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one month for the offence under section 302 IPC.

2. The present case arises out of English Bazar P.S. Case No. 1039/2014 dated December 14, 2014, registered under Sections 341, 326 and 307 of the IPC on the basis of a First Information Report (FIR) and a written complaint lodged by one Rekha Mandal, who is the de facto complainant in the matter.

3. It is the prosecution’s case that on December 14, 2014, the Sub Inspector of the English Bazar Police Station received telephonic information stating that the appellant, one Ram Mandal, had been detained by the local residents in a school at Balupur, following his alleged assault on one Panchanan Mandal, the victim herein, with an iron rod. It was further informed that the appellant had sustained a gunshot injury. Upon receipt of the said information, the police personnel arrived at the location, recovered the appellant from the custody of the local residents and subsequently arrested him.

4. Following the investigation, a charge sheet was submitted against the appellant under Section 302 of the IPC. Upon submission of the charge sheet, the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Malda, took cognizance of the offence and, upon compliance with Section 207 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C"), committed the case to the Court of Sessions under Section 209 of Cr.P.C.

5. Thereafter, the matter was placed before the Court of the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Malda and registered as Sessions Case No. 153 of 2015, corresponding to Sessions Trial Case No. 43 of 2015.

6. Upon consideration of the case records and hearing both parties, the Learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charges against the appellant under Section 302 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. In the course of the trial, the prosecution examined twelve (12) witnesses and produced several documents and material objects marked as Exhibits 1 to 17. The appellant did not lead any evidence in defence but was examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C.

8. Upon completion of the trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, by judgment and order dated May 18, 2018, convicted and sentenced the appellant in accordance with law.

9. The Learned Counsel for the appellant has challenged the findings of the Learned Trial Court on multiple grounds, primarily highlighting inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case and procedural lapses during investigation and trial.

10. It is submitted that key prosecution witnesses being P.Ws. 4, 5, 6 and 7, who claimed to be eyewitnesses, did not disclose the same in their statements under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. Their trial depositions contained several improvements and omissions, raising serious doubts about the credibility of their testimonies. For instance, P.W.5 did not state before the Investigating Officer (IO) that he witnessed the assault or that the appellant concealed himself in his house. Similarly, P.W.7 failed to mention his presence at the scene or that he narrated the incident to P.W.1. These