- (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court, IVth Bench at Calcutta in Sessions Trial No. 1 of March, 1993 corresponding to Sessions case No. 66 of 1992 convicting the accused Rabindranath Ghosh Under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to suffer R.I. for six months more. One Biswaranjan Ghosh of 11, Shyam Square Lane, Calcutta-3 lodged complaint with the O.C. Shyampukur P.S. alleging that he is a resident in the first floor of the house and he resides there with his wife Gita Ghosh and two sons Tapan and Sujan. It is his ancestral property. His two cousin brothers are Asit Ghosh and Rabi Ghosh who also reside in the same house. Asit Ghosh resides in one room in the first floor and Rabi Ghosh resides in one bedroom and a kitchen and a small room on the roof of the house. They are living in separate mess. Rabi Ghosh very often assaults his wife being in intoxicated condition. Bapan aged 16 years and Mou aged 8 years are the son and daughter respectively of Rabi Ghosh. On the date of incident i.e. on 05.07.1992 the informant was coming downstairs at about 9.00 a.m. and he heard that quarrel was going on between Rabi Ghosh and his wife. Bijay Ray and his wife of the neighbouring house told him that. Bapan's mother was being burnt at the roof. The informant also could hear the shouts of Tapati, wife of the accused Rabi saying that she was being burnt. The informant was going upstairs to reach the spot but the accused Rabi was then coming downstairs and intercepted the informant from going upwards. The accused held him there and during the scuffling with the accused the informant sustained some injuries on his chest. At that time Bijoybabu, the neighbour, rushed to the spot and tried to extinguish the fire, but to no effect. The informant held the accused there so that he could not flee away. By that time the neighbouring persons came there and accused Rabi was confined. The information was given to the Police by the wife of the informant and after arrival of the Police the F.I.R. was lodged by Biswaranjan Ghosh @ Bhandul Da(P.W.3).
(2.) After receipt of the complaint, the P.S. case was started and after completion of investigation the charge-sheet was submitted. The charge was framed against the accused person under Section 302. I.P.C. to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial.
(3.) In this case the prosecution has examined as many as 29 P.Ws. P.W.1 is the Photographer. P.W.2 is the Plan Maker. P.W.3 is the informant and cousin brother of the accused, P.W.4 is the wife of the defacto complainant. P.W.5, P.W.6, P.W.7, P.W.8 are the neighbours, P.W.9 is the son of the accused, P.W.10 is the brother of the accused. P.W.11 is the daughter of the accused. P.W.12, P.W.13, P.W.14, P.W.15 and P.W.16 are the relatives of the victim. P.W.17 and P.W.18 are the seizure witnesses. P.W.20 is the constable who identified the dead body of Tapati Ghosh at the morgue. P.W.21 and P.W.22 are the constables who carried some goods to the F.S.L. P.W. 23 runs Fine Arts School and stated that Moumita, the daughter of the accused, attended the said school at the material time. P.W. 24 Ashok Kumar Ghosh accompanied Moumita to the Art School by his cycle. P.W. 25 is the Medical Officer who examined Biswaranjan i.e. the defacto complainant and found scratch mark in the chest which was of very simple in nature. He also found slight tenderness in the scrotum. P.W.26 is the Autopsy Surgeon. P.W. 27, P.W. 28 and P.W. 29 are the Police Officers who conducted the investigation.;