ARIJIT BANERJEE, J. - (1.) The present applicants are two amongst the four accused persons in Sessions Case No.7(8) of 2009 resulting in Sessions Trial No.2(4) of 2011 in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Sealdah, South 24 Parganas. All the accused persons were convicted for offences found punishable under Sections 302/148 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 thereof and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and also to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section148 IPC. The present applicants i.e. Md. Sakil (accused no.3 and applicant in CRAN No.2142 of 2019) and Md. Sahenshah (accused no.1 and applicant in CRAN No.4001 of 2019) have taken out these applications for suspension of sentence and grant of bail pending disposal of the appeal which has been filed by all four convicts.
(2.) The prosecution case in short is that on June 2, 2009 there was an altercation between the victim, Laltu Sk. on one hand and the accused persons on the other. On that day at about 11 p.m. the alleged victim went to Dhubiatala Maidan for dinner. There, the accused persons beat up the victim with bamboo, lathi etc. causing serious injuries to the victim who was taken to the hospital where he succumbed to the injuries on the next day.
(3.) We have gone through the prosecution evidence on record as well as the judgment and order under appeal. The prosecution has projected P.W.4 (mother of the victim) and P.W.12 (brother of the victim) as eye witnesses. Having gone through the evidence of P.W.4 and P.W.12, it appears that there are glaring inconsistencies between their versions. To take one example, according to P.W.4 the incident took place on Dhubiatala maidan which is at a distance of three or four minutes from the house of P.W.4. However, according to P.W.12, who claimed to be a taxi-driver, when he returned to his residence after garaging his taxi he found that there was a scuffle going on between the victim and the accused persons and the accused persons assaulted the victim with iron rod, bamboo etc. However, in cross- examination, P.W.12 stated that Dhobiatola maidan is the place of occurrence. It is 200 meters from his residence. The evidence on record, prima facie, does not disclose that either P.W.4 or P.W.12 were present at the place of occurrence at the time of the incident. Hence, it raises some doubt in our mind at this stage as to whether they were eye witnesses to the incident.;