Supreme Court of India
AFTAB ALAM & RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, JJ.
Subal Ghorai & Others - Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 88 of 2007
Decided On : 02-04-2013
Criminal Trial - Appreciation of evidence - Interested witness - Not necessarily a bad witness - The evidence has to be analysed with care - Can be relied upon if truthful and in accord with the relevant circumstances on record. (Para 19)
(1999) 9 SCC 525 - Relied upon
(1991) 1 SCC 519; (2012) 7 SCC 646; (1999) 8 SCC 649; (2012) 7 SCC 646 - Referred
(b) Criminal Trial - Identification in court - witnesses identifying accused in court - No infirmity. (Para 20)
(2003) 5 SCC 746 - Relied upon
(2008) 15 SCC 440; (2010) 13 SCC 657; (2011) 2 SCC 715; (2011) 3 SCC 654 - Referred
(c) Criminal Trial - Motive - Absence of - When there is credible evidence of eye-witnesses on record, the motive pales into insignificance. (Para 20)
(2010) 12 SCC 91 - Referred
(d) Indian penal Code, 1860 - Section 149 - Constructive liability - Must not lead to false implication of innocent bystanders - Common object of the unlawful assembly is essential - All accused carrying weapons coming after a conch-call - Several of them assaulting deceased person brutally - Their conduct before the attack, at the time of the attack, after the attack and near the scene of offence establishing unlawful assembly having common object to murder deceased and set fire to their houses - Conviction with aid of section 149 justified. (Para 31)
(1989) 1 SCC 437; (1991) Supp. (2) SCC 437; (1998) 6 SCC 554; AIR 1965 SC 202; (2009) 7 SCC 415; (2009) 10 SCC 773; (2011) 7 SCC 295 - Relied upon
(1996) 10 SCC 79; (2011) 5 SCC 324; (1983) 4 SCC 10; (2010) 9 SCC 567; (2011) 6 SCC 396; (2011) 9 SCC 479; (2012) 4 SCC 327; (2003) 6 SCC 73 - Referred
(e) Criminal Trial - Conviction - FIR drawn after meticulous exercise omitting names of five accused persons - Other evidence raising suspicion of their involvement in the crime - Entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 32 and 33)
(2010) 9 SCC 111; (2007) 15 SCC 760 - Referred
Facts of the case:
On 14/5/1986, the goat of deceased-Hemanta damaged the paddy of A1-Subal. Juvenile delinquent-Gopal and his mother beat the said goat. Juvenile delinquent-Gopal was detained by deceased-Hemanta and, after sometime, he was released. This infuriated the accused. They came to the bund armed with weapons and attacked deceased-Hemanta, deceased-Manik and deceased-Gour, who succumbed to the injuries sustained by them. They also assaulted PW-2 Lakshmi, PW-5 Ananta, PW-12 Jamini and PW-13 Mandakini.
Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants-accused and A25-Subal, A27-Tapan, A30-Padmalochan, A31-Dima, A32-Manick, A33-Sankar and A34-Bhakti Maity for the offences punishable under Section 302 r/w Section 149 of the IPC as also section 436 r/w 149 IPC. Appellants-A1-Subal, A2-Bistu, A18-Nentu and A21-Kengal were also convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 148 of the IPC. Appellants A3-Ranjit, A4-Sunil, A5-Pulin, A6-Sudarshan, A7-Nemai, A8-Biswanath, A9-Joydeb, A10-Tarapada, A11-Bistu, A12-Bhanu, A13-Uttam, A14-Sambu, A15-Dipu and A16-Subal Samanta, A18-Nentu, A19-Rakhal, A20-Batul, A21-Kengal, A22-Nikhil, A23-Sibu, A24-Dhiren, A25-Subal Shee, A26-Niranjan and A27-Tapan and 7 others were also convicted and sentenced for offence punishable under Section 147 of the IPC. Appellants A2-Bistu and A21-Kengal were also convicted and sentenced for offence punishable under Section 324 of the IPC.
The High Court confirmed conviction and sentence of the appellants-accused. However, the High Court acquitted A25-Subal Shee, A27-Tapan Pramanik, A30-Padmalochan Das, A31-Dima Pramanik, A32-Manick Pramanik, A33-Sankar Das and A34-Bhakti Bhusan Maity.
Finding of the Court:
Conviction with the aid of section 149 IPC justified.
Result : Appeal partly allowed.
Judgment :-
Smt. Ranjana Prakash Desai, J.
1. The appellants viz. A1-Subal Ghorai, A2-Bishnupada Ghorai, A3-Ranjit Samanta (since deceased), A4-Sunil Senapati, A5 Pulin Sat @ Samanta, A6- Sudarshan Ghorai, A7-Nemai Ghorai, A8-Biswanath Ghorai, A9-Joydeb Ghori @ Bhatu, A10-Tarapada Samanta, A11-Bistu Samanta, A12-Bhanu Samanta, A13-Uttam Samanta @ Bhalu, A14-Sambhu Jana, A15-Dipu Samanta @ Dipak, A16-Subal Samanta (since deceased), A17-Dulal Samanta (since deceased), A18-Nentu Dhara (since deceased), A19-Rakhal Dhara, A20-Batul Dhara, A21-Kengal Senapati, A22-Nikhil Senapati, A23-Sibu Pramanik, A24-Dhiren Shee @ Singh (since deceased), A26-Niranjan Das, A28-Sambhu Samanta, A29-Probodh Jana, A35-Satrughna Patra and A36-Duryadhan Patra (“appellants accused”) along with 7 other accused viz. A25-Subal Shee @ Singh, A27-Tapan Pramanik, A30-Padmalochan Das, A31-Dima Pramanik, A32-Manick Pramanik, A33-Sankar Das and A34-Bhakti Bhusan Maity were tried by the 4th Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Midnapore in Sessions Trial Case No.XXIII of May, 1989, for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149, Section 324 read with Section 149 and Section 436 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (“the IPC”).
2. It must be mentioned here that the charge-sheet mentioned the names of 39 persons but learned Additional Sessions Judge commenced the sessions trial in respect of 36 persons because out of 39 persons, 3 persons were held to be juveniles. Their trial was separated from that of the remaining 36 persons. For the sake of convenience, we shall refer to the accused as per the numbers assigned to them by the trial court.
3. The prosecution case shall be stated more in detail, a little later. Suffice it to state, at this stage, that the case of the prosecution in short was that on 14/5/1986, the goat of deceased-Hemanta damaged the paddy of A1-Subal. Juvenile delinquent-Gopal and his mother beat the said goat. Juvenile delinquent-Gopal was detained by deceased-Hemanta and, after sometime, he was released. This infuriated the accused. They came to the bund armed with weapons and attacked deceased-Hemanta, deceased-Manik and deceased-Gour, who succumbed to the injuries sustained by them. They also assaulted PW-2 Lakshmi, PW-5 Ananta, PW-12 Jamini and PW-13 Mandakini. PW-1 Promila, the wife of Mohanta Dhara, who witnessed the incident, lodged the FIR. The accused were then arrested and tried as aforesaid. The prosecution in support of its case examined 20 witnesses. In defence, the accused examined 8 witnesses. They denied the prosecution case. A1-Subal Ghorai, A24-Dhiren Shee and A34-Bhakti Bhushan pleaded defence of alibi.
4. After considering the evidence, by judgment and order dated 7/9/1994, learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellants-accused and A25-Subal, A27-Tapan, A30-Padmalochan, A31-Dima, A32-Manick, A33-Sankar and A34-Bhakti Maity for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, they were directed to undergo two years rigorous imprisonment. They were also convicted under Section 436 read with Section 149 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, they were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. Appellants-A1-Subal, A2-Bistu, A18-Nentu and A21-Kengal were also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 148 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-. In default of payment of fine, they were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. Appellants A3-Ranjit, A4-Sunil, A5-Pulin, A6-Sudarshan, A7-Nemai, A8- Biswanath, A9-Joydeb, A10-Tarapada, A11-Bistu, A12-Bhanu, A13-Uttam, A14-Sambu, A15-Dipu and A16-Subal Samanta, A18-Nentu, A19-Rakhal, A20-Batul,A21-Kengal,
Sherey v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Akbar Sheikh v. State of West Bengal
Pandurang Chandrakant Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra
Debashis Daw v. State of West Bengal
State of Andhra Pradesh v. Thakkidiran Reddy
Lalji v. State of Uttar Pradesh
State (repr. by Inspector of Police, Tamil Nadu) v. Sait @ Krishnakumar
Sunil Kumar Sambhudayal Gupta (Dr.) v. State of Maharashtra
Kuldip Yadav v. State of Bihar
Brathi @ Sukhdev Singh v. State of Punjab
Shyamal Ghosh v. State of West Bengal
Malkhansingh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Sheo Shankar Singh v. State of Jharkhand
Rammi v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Shyamal Gosh v. State of West Bengal
Sheo Shankar Singh and Bipin Kumar Mondal v. State of West Bengal
C. Muniappan v. State of Tamil Nadu
Bhagwan Das v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Mrinal Das v. State of Tripura
Bhajju v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.