Form No. J(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Present :

The Hon’ble Justice Rajasekhar Mantha And The Hon’ble Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta CRA 559 of 2014 Uma Dey &Anr.

Vs.

The State of West Bengal With CRA 329 of 2014 Tapan Dey Vs.

The State of West Bengal With CRA 354 of 2014 Baikuntha Nandi @ Sadhubaba @ Sadhu Vs.

The State of West Bengal For the Appellants in CRA 559 of 2014 : Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharya Ms. Sukla Das Chandra Mr. Bhaskar Seth Ms. Swarnali Saha For the Appellants in CRA 329 of 2014 and CRA 354 of 2014 : Mr. Arndam Jana Mr. Rajiv Lochan Chakraborty Mr. Sumanta Ganguly Mr. Debapratim Guha Ms. A Sarkar Mr. Yuvraj Chatterjee For the State : Mr. Madhushudan Sur Mr. Arani Bhattacharya Heard on : 27th March, 2025 Judgment on : 2nd April, 2025 Rajasekhar Mantha, J.

1. The present appeals are directed against judgement and/or order of conviction dated 10th April 2014, 21st April, April 2014 and 22nd April 2014 passed by the Special Court, I.E. Act –cum- Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Trial No.352 of 2009 convicting the appellants under Sections

498A, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharyya, learned counsel for the appellant in CRA

559 of 2014 submits that there is no charge framed under Section 201 of the IPC. He further submits that the learned Sessions Court has convicted the appellants under Section 498A, 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code without mention of Section 34 of the IPC.

3. He further submits that the learned Sessions Court had acted illegally beyond its authority in sentencing the appellants to rigorous imprisonment till death under Section 302 of the IPC. The Sessions Judge has also not imposed any fine.

4. He has further pointed out that the Sessions Court had not fixed any date for the examination of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. and has done it suo moto.

5. The signature of the Sessions Judge has not been available on the examination under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. This according to the learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharyya, is ex facie illegal. His clients have been deprived of a fair opportunity to defend themselves in trial.

6. The records, however, indicate that by three several orders dated 27th June, 2012, 18th July, 2012 and 1st September, 2012 the learned Magistrate has fixed dates for examination of the accused under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.

7. Another convicted appellant Pushpa Dey, mother-in-law of the victim Pratima, died during the pendency of these appeals. Her Appeal has abated.

8. The prosecution case in brief is that on 20th February, 2009 at about 11 pm the victims namely, Pratima Dey and her two daughters, Lakshmi Dey, and Saraswati Dey were dragged to the terrace of the house at Berhampore and were strangled first and then set on fire by each of the appellants. Pratima and her younger daughter Saraswati died of strangulation and burn injuries at the place of occurrence. The third victim Lakshmi died on the way to the hospital. Lakshmi and Saraswati were 12 and 10 years old respectively, at the time of occurrence of the incident.

9. A complaint was lodged by the PW-1, Arati Pal, mother of the victim, indicating that her daughter was tortured and killed by her son-in-law, Tapan Dey, his mother Pushpa Dey and sister-in-law Uma Dey, and a third person Baikuntha Nandi.

10. The victim Pratima Dey was married to Tapan Dey (appellant in CRA 329 of

2014) 15 years prior to the date of the incident. It is alleged that the appellants used topressurise the victim to bring money from her house and/or indulge in prostitution. On refusal of the victim, the appellants Tapan Dey, Puspa Dey and Uma Dey set the victims on fire.

11. An alternative case is also set up in the complaint that the daughter of the complainant committed suicide after killing her two daughters unable to bear torture from her in-laws.

12. The complaint was lodged at about 10.45 a.m., the succeeding day, i.e., 21st February, 2