Prosecution must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; failure to establish a solid evidentiary basis results in acquittal.

JUDGMENT :

SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J.

1. The instant appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment of conviction dated 20.09.1997 and order of sentence dated 22.09.1997 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bokaro, in Sessions Trial No.443 of 1994 whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted under sections 302/34 and section 394 of IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment each under sections 302/34 IPC and 394 IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. At the outset it needs to refer herein that it is evident from the order dated 05.02.2025 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court that one of the appellant Ludka Kandu alias Bhagwan Das, Son of Late Gopal Kandu has died during the pendency of the instant appeal, hence, the instant appeal has already abated against him.

Prosecution Case:

3. The prosecution case, in brief, as per the fardbeyan dated 15.12.1993, of the informant Nand Lal Dey (P.W.-1), is that on 15.12.1993, in the morning at 6.30 A.M., informant along with other family members had gone to Rajrappa for marriage of his niece (bhagni) Shanti Dutta. Informant further stated that before going to Rajrappa, entire room of the house was locked and his old fuaa (father's sister) Khenubala Dasi, was left to look after the house.

4. Informant further stated that in Rajrappa, marriage was performed and they left for Chas at about 4.30 P.M., in the evening and they reached their house at about 7.30 P.M. and at the time of entering the house, the electricity in the entire market was cut. He entered into the house in dark and called his fuaa (father's sister), but, she did not answer. Then, he told his son-in-law (damad) Ranjan Dutta to bring candle and in the light of the candle they entered into the house and found the lock of the door of the room situated on the way from baramada was broken. On entering inside the room, they found lock of the rooms and boxes were broken and articles kept inside the boxes were scattered. They became nervous and started searching fuaa (father's sister) and found her lying, in pool of blood, on the floor of the stair case room. It has further been stated that neck of fuaa (father's sister) was found cut with a sharp cutting weapon and she was dead.

5. Informant has further alleged that the room situated on the first floor was also opened and ornaments of gold and silver and other articles were missing from the box. Informant suspected hand of Gopi Dey, Suvash Ghosal, Ludka Kandu, Genda Dhibar and Jaideo Dhiber in the alleged commission of crime as Jaideo Dhiber wanted to marry his niece Shanti Dutta and had threatened to kidnap her.

6. On the basis of fardbeyan of the informant, F.I.R being Chas P.S. case no. 216/1993 dated 15.12.1993 was registered under section 302 and 382 of IPC against the against Gopi Dey, Suvash Ghosal, Ludka Kandu, Genda Dhibarand Jaideo Dhiber. After investigation, charge sheet was submitted against the accused persons and the cognizance of the offense were taken and the case was committed to the court of sessions.

7. Charges under Sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. were framed against the appellant Madhab Chandra Dey and also against Ludka Kandu (since dead) including the accused Rajesh Kumar Dutta. Separate charges were framed against the appellant Madhab Chandra Dey and Ludka Kandu under section 412 of IPC. Charges were explained to them to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The accused persons along the appellant herein, were examined u/s 313 Cr.P.C. wherein