2026 Supreme(Cal) 69

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
ANANYA BANDYOPADHYAY, J.
Shib Sadhan Ghose & Ors. - Appellant
Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors. - Respondent
C.R.A. 51 of 1988
Decided On : 22-05-2026

Injured witness testimony carries high reliability and justifies conviction, even when investigative procedural lapses occur. In cases of extreme delay in appellate proceedings, the court may exercise discretion to reduce substantive sentences to the period already undergone by the accused.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 and 109 - Criminal trial - Unlawful assembly and assault - Reliability of injured witnesses - Evidentiary value of ocular testimony - Procedural lapses in investigation - Sentencing in cases of protracted litigation. (Paras 12, 13, 14, 16, 31, 32, 35, 36)

(B) Evidence - Injured witnesses - Credibility - Presence of injuries on the person of witness serves as a guarantee of their presence at scene, reinforcing the reliability of their testimony - Consistent identification of assailants and weapons by victims creates a coherent prosecution narrative that remains resilient despite minor investigative gaps. (Paras 31(iv) and 31(v))

(C) Criminal Procedure - Investigation - Procedural irregularities, such as the failure to prepare a site sketch map or alleged defects in formal entrustment of investigations, do not fatalistically invalidate the prosecution of an offence if the direct, credible testimony of injured witnesses remains untainted by material contradictions. (Paras 14 and 31(vi))

Facts of the case:
The matter originated from a longstanding dispute over landed property. It was alleged that several individuals formed an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, and initiated a violent assault against members of a family. The trial court convicted the accused under various provisions. The defense challenged the conviction on grounds of investigative deficiency, lack of numerical sufficiency for constructive liability, and inconsistency between the medical report and oral evidence, further noting the excessive delay spanning over four decades in the appellate process.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the presence of injuries on the victims, coupled with their spontaneous accounts, provided a highly reliable basis for conviction. Procedural lapses during investigation, while noted, were found insufficient to destroy the credibility of the primary eyewitnesses. The court affirmed the findings of guilt but held that the excessive time elapsed since the commission of the offence and the advanced age of the surviving appellants necessitated a compassionate view regarding the quantum of sentence.

Issues: Whether the conviction for unlawful assembly and physical assault is sustainable based on the testimony of injured witnesses notwithstanding procedural lapses in the investigation, and whether the sentence should be modified in light of the protracted pendency of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: Injured witnesses are deemed the most reliable witnesses in criminal trials; their testimony, once credible and supported by medical evidence, is sufficient to prove guilt even in the face of minor investigative irregularities. While procedural compliance is ideal, it is secondary to the quality of direct, ocular evidence. Furthermore, when prolonged litigation causes undue mental agony over several decades, reducing the substantive sentence to the period already served serves the ends of justice while maintaining the conviction.

Result: Conviction affirmed; sentence modified to the period of imprisonment already undergone; appeal dismissed.