SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(Gau) 390

TRIPURA HIGH COURT
Akil Kureshi, C. J., *Arindam Lodh, J.
Raju Malakar v. State of Tripura
Sessions Case No. ST(T - 1) 18 of 2014



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: S. Bhattacharya
For the Respondents: S. Debnath

The last seen theory applies when substantial circumstantial evidence aligns with the timeline of events and the conduct of the accused post-incident undermines his defense.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302 and 201 - Conviction for murder and destruction of evidence - Appellant convicted for life imprisonment and fine imposed by Sessions Judge for the murder of the deceased driver, with both sentences to run concurrently - Circumstantial evidence established through witness testimonies, the last seen theory, and recovery of incriminating materials from the accused's residence - Medical evidence confirmed homicidal nature of death - Not sufficient grounds for appeal. (Paras 1-42)

(B) Evidence - Last Seen Theory - When a deceased is last seen with an accused shortly before death, the burden shifts to the accused to explain the circumstances of death. (Paras 27, 30, 42)

(C) Recovery of Evidence - Confessional statements and material recovered at the instance of the accused supported the prosecution's case even amidst some lapses in investigation. (Paras 32-38)

Table of Content
1. circumstantial evidence of the crime. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. analysis of last seen theory. (Para 7 , 11 , 26 , 29 , 30)
3. contentions regarding evidence and timing. (Para 9 , 10)
4. legal precedents on last seen theory. (Para 27 , 28 , 31)
5. cumulative circumstantial evidence. (Para 32 , 33 , 35 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41)
6. dismissal of appeal and affirmation of conviction. (Para 42 , 43)

1. In impugnment, is the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 17.10.2015, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, North Tripura, Dharmanagar, in case No. ST(T - 1) 18 of 2014, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default to suffer further R.I. for 6 months for the offence punishable under S.302 of IPC and also sentenced to suffer R.I. for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to suffer further R.I. for 3 months for the offence under S.201 of IPC and it was directed that both the sentences imposed upon the appellant shall run concurrently.

2. The prosecution case, as unearthed, in brief, is that on 24.12.2013 at 3.05 pm an information was received by Panisagar police station from one Priti Ranjan Chakma, the officer - in - charge of Panisagar Fire Service station, that a dead body was lying in the cabin of a truck at Bilthai Parking zone under Panisagar police station. The information was immediately recorded in the General Dairy of the police station as GD Entry No. 755 dated 24-12-2013 and Pradyut Ch. Dutta, Officer - in - Charge of the police station, directed S.I., Debshish Saha to rush to the place of occurrence, and while S.I. Debasish Saha rushed to the place of occurrence found a dead body lying inside the cabin of a truck bearing registration No. TR01E1639. Sri Manna Dey, son of Manik Ch. Dey, a hotel owner of Panisagar, volunteered to lodge a complaint to police at the spot. Accordingly, he lodged an oral complaint with Debasish Saha, Sub-Inspector of police of Panisagar P.S. at Bilthai parking point on 24.12.2013 at 3.45 pm.
The complainant alleged, inter alia, that at about 3.00 pm on that day he found the dead body of the driver of a truck bearing registration No.TR01E1639 inside the cabin of the truck. The head of the deceased was crushed and his tongue was found between his teeth and the complainant suspected that the driver was killed. The police officer also found the driving licence of the deceased inside the tool box. The driving licence revealed that the dead body was of Narayan Ch. Roy of Roy Coloney, Amtali of West Tripura District.

3. Being endorsed, the investigating officer took up the case for investigation. During investigation, the I.O. visited the place of occurrence, prepared inquest of the dead body and made seizure of the articles found at the P.O. He had also sent the body of the deceased for post - mortem examination and examined the material witnesses of the case. On 27.12.2013, the I.O. arrested the accused from his hideout and also recovered the weapon of offence at the instance of the accused and collected other incriminating materials against the accused. After completion of the investigation, the investigating officer submitted a charge - sheet against the accused, Raju Malakar for committing offence punishable under S.302 and S.201 of Indian Penal Code .

4. Being committed, the learned Additional Sessions Judge took cognizance of offence and framed the following charges against accused Raju Malakar, which are as follows: -
"That, on or about the 24 day of December, 2013 at any time before 15.30 hours at Bilthai parking area on Assam Agartala road you committed murder of Narayan ch. Roy by intentionally causing his death and you thereby committed an offence punishable under S.302 of IPC and with my cognizance.
Secondly, that you on or about the same date and at the same time and place committed murder by intentionally causing the death of Narayan ch. Roy punishable with
























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top