- (1.) This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 8th October, 2004 by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Alipurduar in Sessions Trial no. 31 of 2004 connected with Sessions Case no. 76 of 2004 ( State Vs. Charua Munda ) convicted the sole accused of an offence punishable under Section 304 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to imprisonment for life as also to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- by way of fine, in default to undergo further imprisonment for a year. The reasoning adopted by the learned Trial Court for the purpose of convicting the accused is as follows :- " in the instant case the evidence like calling the victim from his house by the accused and the accused and the victim last seen together within 2 hours from the death of the deceased and the victim going away from his house and hiding himself for about 10 days soon after the incident and also he himself being caught by the local people and he is surrendered to the P.S and also he himself offering no explanation or rather he gave false explanation at the relevant time that he was engaged in work and also during the period of absence he went out for work and such false explanation of the accused is added as an additional link to the chain of the event presented by the prosecution before this court and further this court is satisfied from proved circumstances here from which inference of guilt of the accused could be drawn only and thus, the circumstance unerringly point to the guilt of the accused and, further, all these circumstances when taken together are incapable of any explanation on any reasonable hypothesis save the guilt of the accused and also those circumstances being consistent and conclusive in nature exclude the possibility of guilt of any other person than the accused."
(2.) Mr. Kallol Mondal, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, engaged by the Court, submitted that there is absolutely no evidence on the basis of which the appellant could have been convicted of the offence punishable under Section 304 I.P.C.
(3.) Mr. Sanyal assisted by Mr. Dey appearing for the state submitted that this Court has to reassess the evidence, although he did not dispute the fact that there is no evidence on the record to establish that the deceased was last seen with the accused at any material point of time. We, therefore, propose to look into the evidence adduced by the prosecution.;