JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Leave granted.
(2.) Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment rendered by a
Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court upholding the
conviction for offence punishable under Section 302 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC') and sentence of
imprisonment of life awarded by learned Additional Sessions
Judge, 2nd Court, Malda in Sessions Trial No.51/2001.
(3.) Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:
On 13.2.1994 round about 2.30 p.m. a young girl called
Bharati Mondal was returning home, carrying a bundle of
'Khari' on her head. As the 'Khari' struck on the body of the
appellant Kulesh Mondal, the accused Naresh Mondal
(acquitted by the High Court) and his brother appellant-
Kulesh Mondal hurled filthy languages at her. Shocked by
such behaviour of the accused, the informant Naren Mondal
raised his strong protest. There ensued bickering amongst
them. It was followed by hurling of brickbats at the informant.
While such things had been going on, one Chakku Mondal
(hereinafter referred to as the deceased) was passing along the
road. He came to the spot to enquire as to what had been
going on there. Finding him there, the accused Naresh Mondal
dragged him to the place of occurrence and his brother
appellant Kulesh Mondal delivered a fatal blow on his neck
with a 'Hasua'. The injured Chakku Mondal having sustained
severe injury on his neck, efforts were made to shift him to the
hospital. Unfortunately, the injured succumbed to his injury
before his arrival in the hospital.
With the informant Naren Mondal reporting the incident
with the local P.S. Manikchak P.S. Case No.10/1994 dated
13/02/1994 under Sections 341/323/302/34 IPC was
registered against Kulesh Mondal and others. Following the
inquest over the dead body, the Investigating officer sent the
dead body to the Malda Sadar Hospital for post mortem
examination. The investigation proceeded in it usual way with
the Investigating officer preparing a sketch map of the place of
occurrence. He also seized blood stained earth, control earth,
few pieces of broken tiles and brickbats, some dry woods and
prepared seizure list in presence of the witnesses.
Subsequently, the blood stained wearing apparels of the victim
were also seized. Despite raids being conducted, to apprehend
the culprits, the accused persons evaded arrest for a long
time. Eventua1ly, they were arrested one after another. The
arrest of principal accused Kulesh Mondal could be made only
on 18.6.1994. The Investigating Officer, in the meantime,
examined the available witnesses. The statement of Bharati
Mondal recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (in short the 'Cr.P.C.') was collected.
Collection of the post mortem report was also made. On
completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted.
Following the commitment of the case, the learned
Additional Sessions Judge framed charges under Sections
3O2/34, 323/34 and 337/34 IPC against the appellant and
others. The accused persons having pleaded innocence, the
prosecution examined 14 witnesses to bring home the charges.
Amongst the notable witnesses were the eyewitnesses of the
occurrence, the witnesses of the seizure of the incriminating
articles, the doctor conducting the post mortem examination
and the officer who investigated the case. The learned Judicial
Magistrate recording the statement of Bharati Mondal was also
examined as a prosecution witness. Placing strong reliance on
the statements of the eyewitnesses and the supportive post
mortem report, learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted
the appellant Kulesh Mondal and his brother Naresh Mondal
for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 read
with Section 34 IPC. The trial court found the evidence to be
credible and cogent and, therefore, found the two accused
persons guilty of offences punishable under Section 302 read
with Section 34 IPC. They were sentenced to rigorous
imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/- each, in default,
rigorous imprisonment for six months. Both the accused
persons were, however, acquitted of the charges under Section
323/34 and 337/34 IPC. The four other accused persons
namely Radhik Mondal, Anil Mondal, Uttam Mondal and
Dipen Mondal were acquitted, as the materials against them
were not found sufficient enough.
Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence under Section
302/34 IPC, both the convicted accused persons jointly
preferred an appeal before the High Court.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.