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

The Hon’ble Justice Soumen Sen And The Hon’ble Justice Uday Kumar C.R.A 234 of 2017 Durjodhan Pramanik & Ors.

Vs.

The State of West Bengal For the Appellants : Mr. Sudipta Maitra, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Sourav Chatterjee, Sr. Adv. Mr. Pawan Kumar Gupta, Adv.

Mr. Sougata Mitra, Adv.

Mr. Vijay Varma, Adv. Ms. Sofia Nesar, Adv.

Mr. Nikhil Gupta, Adv.

Mr. Subhadeep Maitra, Adv.

Mr. Santanu Sett, Adv.

Ms. Soma Chakraborty, Adv.

Ms. Subhasri Chatterjee, Adv.

Mr. Dwaipayan Biswas, Adv.

For the Respondent : Mr. Debasish Roy, Ld. P.P Ms. Amita Gaur, Adv.

Hearing concluded on : 28th March, 2025 Judgment dated : 25th April, 2025 Uday Kumar, J: -

1. This appeal is directed againstthe judgment of conviction dated

07.02.2017 and order of sentence dated 08.02.2017 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, 3rd Court Purulia, in connection with Sessions Case No. 220 of 2014, Sessions Trial Case No. 30 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 509 of 2014, which arose out of Balarampur Police Station Case No. 26 of 2014 dated 12.05.2014 under Sections

363/365/302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as I.P.C.).

PROSECUTION CASE IN BRIEF

2. The prosecution's case revolved around the tragic disappearance and subsequent brutal murder of one Jayanta Kumar in the backdrop of a pre-existing land dispute between families giving rise to framing of charges and culminated in the conviction of the appellants for offences under Sections 364/302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Pursuant to a complaint resulting in Balarampur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2014 lodged by Manbhula Kumar (PW-4), alleging offences against certain accused persons, since Jayanta Kumar went missing on the night of 11th May 2014 while en-route to his new house. His father, Mahabir Kumar (PW-1), reported his disappearance, leading to the registration of the aforesaid complaint.

3. The investigation unfolded with the arrest of the Appellant, Durjodhan Paramanik, who allegedly confessed to the crime and implicated his co-appellants. Pursuant to these purported disclosures, the beheaded torso of Jayanta Kumar was recovered from Ekra Forest. Subsequently, the severed head, a weapon (tangi), and other personal belongings were recovered from different locations. The prosecution's case rested primarily on the chain of recoveries linked to the alleged confessional statements of the accused in police custody, along with alleged motive of prior enmity.

4. Pre-existing land dispute between the families of the accused and the deceased, fostered an atmosphere of animosity, which was further exacerbated by the lodging of Balarampur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2014 against the accused, alleging serious offences. In this charged environment, Jayanta Kumar, being concerned for the safety of his sister-in-law Manbhula Kumar (PW-4) after the alleged incident of 9th May 2014, decided to stay with her. He did not reach his new house after leaving his ancestral home on the night of 11th May 2014. The accused became weary of false and fabricated allegations found themselves under the scanner once again.

5. The Officer-in-Charge of Balarampur Police Station assigned Sub-

Inspector Jal Kumar Mandi to investigate the matter. On 11th May 2014, in the evening, SI Mandi visited the location and handed over certain documents to Jayanta Kumar, the younger son of the complainant Mahabir Kumar (PW-1), who happened to be present at the scene.

6. Jayanta later returned to his ancestral home in Deoli. Meanwhile, Bikash Kumar and his mother had taken their elder son to Bansgarh Hospital for treatment. Manbhula remained alone in the newly constructed house, gripped by fear following the previous night’s traumatic incident. Eventually, Jayanta decided to spend the night at the new house to ensure her safety. He left after dinner, intending to walk a short distance - roughly a kilometre - from the old house to the new one, which he never m