MUNSHI HEMBRAM Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

LAWS(CAL)-2010-7-53

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA

Decided on July 07,2010

MUNSHI HEMBRAM Appellant

VERSUS

STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) FACTS :- Ramali Hembram was married to Ruplal Hembram, the appellant no.3 above named. The facts reveal that Ramali died an unnatural death due to strangulation. Her death was certified by the post mortem doctor being PW2 14 as anti-mortem and homicidal in nature. As per the written complaint lodged by her mother Champa Hansda, being PW-1. Ramali was married two years before her death. She had a baby aged one year old. The baby was unwell. On September 9, 2000 Champa paid a visit to in-law's house of Ramali where she was staying. There had been some scuffle on the issue of preparation of rice where Munshi Hembram, the appellant no.1 rebuked Ramali. Dukhu and Madhu, the appellants nos. 2 and 4 brothers of Ruplal supported their father on the issue. Champa accepted their hospitality and stayed there overnight. On the next morning she returned home and left for work. While she was working in the land of Kistu Soren, her son Rabin went to the field and called her back and informed her that a person from Pashoi Village (Ramali's in-law's place) had come and informed that Ramali had died. She rushed to Ramali's place and found Ramali was lying on the varandah of Ruplal. She had a mark of rope on her neck. Dukhu, Madhu, Ruplal and Munshi took the body to the burial ground as would appear from her evidence. After the ritual was over she came back to her place. She narrated the incident to her brother Radha Soren, PW-11 who advised her to lodge a complain at the Police Station. Accordingly she lodged a written complaint on September 11, 2000.
(2.) INQUEST :- The police, acting on the complaint, exhumed the body from the burial ground in presence of the Executive Magistrate being PW-5. As per the Inquest Report, the body was decomposed. The tongue came out from the mouth, eyes were closed, left ear was partially torn. A black stain was seen on the throat of the deceased. The Magistrate observed that it was a case of murder.
(3.) PROSECUTION EVIDENCE :- PW-1 (Champa Hansda) :- Champa supported her complaint. While elaborating, she deposed that the accused persons used to assault Ramali. She saw the deadbody with the mark of injury on her neck. She requested the villagers to bury the deadbody and wait till her relations came. However, nobody paid any heed to her request. One Debashis Dhar wrote the written complaint as per her instruction. She put her L.T.I. The police went to the place of occurrence and exhumed the dead body from the grave and held inquest. The body was brought to Jangipur Hospital for post mortem examination and after post mortem the body was cremated at Berhampore Cremation Ground. During crossexamination she however admitted that she had doubt over the dead body. Champa however specifically did not depose whether she was present at the time of exhumation of the deadbody or who identified the grave and/or the dead body, as the case may be, to the police. She however deposed that at about 4.30 p.m. she left the place when the dead body was buried. She further deposed that she alone was present. When the dead body was exhumed it was decomposed and difficult to be identified. PW-2 (Rabin Hansda) :- Rabin was the brother of Ramali. He found mark of injury on her neck. According to him, Ramali became indisposed after delivery of her child and as such could not do much work. PW-3 (Sambhu Sengupta) :- The witness was a neighbour of Champa. He was declared hostile. PW-4 (Kista Soren) :- The witness was also a neighbour of the appellants. He was also declared hostile. He deposed that he did not know how Ramali had expired. PW-5 (Sabuj Baran Sarkar):- The witness was the Executive Magistrate. He went there as being directed by the Sub-divisional Officer, Jangipur. On September 11, 2000, the dead body was exhumed in his presence. He made the inquest. He found mark of injury on the dead body. He referred the dead body for post mortem examination. He proved his report. PW-6 (Debasish Dhar) :- The witness was the scribe to the FIR. He proved the FIR being Exhibit 2. PW-7 (Kamal Soren) :- The witness was also a neighbour. He deposed that Ramali was murdered by Munshi, Ruplal, Dukhu and Madhu by throttling. She was laid to rest in the graveyard. Police and Magistrate exhumed the dead body from the graveyard after being informed. He was present at that time. He signed the inquest. According to him, the graveyard was at Kanchanpur being five kilometres away from their place. He, however, did not witness the burial. PW-8 (Bablu Sarkar) :- The witness was a neighbour of the accused. He was a member of the Gram Panchayat. According to him, Munshi, Madhu and Ruplal used to torture of Ramali. As a member of Gram Panchayat, he requested them not to torture the victim who was sick. He also noticed a mark of black spot at her neck. He saw the accused returning after burial and then fleeing away from their house. On September 11, 2000 Police and Magistrate came to the village and exhumed the dead body from the graveyard. They examined the dead body and found a mark of injury on the neck of the victim in his presence. He disclosed his identity to the Police and Magistrate. He stated to the Magistrate and Police that the accused tortured the victim and the victim had mark of injury on her neck. PW-9 (Rameswar Mardi) :- The witness was a neighbour of Champa. He was declared hostile. According to him, his signature was obtained at Pashoi (the village where the appellants were residing). Champa, Rabin and Kamal also signed at Pashoi. PW-10 (Kesto Soren) :- The witness was a neighbour of Champa. He was declared hostile. PW-11 (Radha Soren) :- Radha Soren was the brother of Champa. According to him, Ramali became sick after giving birth to the child. Her in-laws used to torture her as she was not in a position to work. They buried the dead body. On being informed, the Police and Magistrate went to the village and exhumed the dead body from the graveyard. He also found a mark on the neck of the victim as also bleeding and oozing from the neck. She also found urine and stool coming out. The dead body was sent to Jangipur Hospital for post mortem and was taken back after post mortem. She also witnessed the inquest report. According to her, the dead body became decomposed. PW-12 (Arjun Hansda) :- Witness was a Home Guard who carried the dead body for post mortem examination. PW-13 (Ratan Kr. Choudhury) :- The witness was the Sub-inspector of Police attached to Raghunathganj Police Station. At the relevant time he registered the complaint made by Champa. He also took up the investigation and got the body exhumed in presence of Executive Magistrate. He prepared the inquest report. He collected the Post mortem Report from the hospital and ultimately submitted chargesheet and arrested the accused persons. In cross-examination he deposed that he did not know the victim from before. He denied the facts that the body exhumed from the graveyard was not of Ramali. In cross-examination he also deposed that had there been any responsible person like Panchayat member or school teacher he would have taken his signature. PW-14 (Dr. Santosh Kr. Bhuia) :- The witness was the Medical Officer attached to Berhampore General Hospital on the relevant date. He conducted the post mortem examination and proved his report during trial.;

Click here to view full judgement.