GIDDU ALIAS MONGAL MUDI Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL
LAWS(CAL)-1997-12-5
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on December 05,1997

GIDDU ALIAS MONGAL MUDI Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF WEST BENGAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

KALYAN J.SENGUPTA, J. - (1.) This appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 7th July, 1989 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri S. K. Das, First Court, Midnapore, in sessions trial case No. VI of January, 1989.
(2.) The appellant before us has been indicted and later on convicted by the impugned judgment and order to suffer life imprisonment for life for the charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution was started pursuant to a complaint made by the P.W. 1 herein which is part of the FIR. The contents of the FIR in gist, is on 31st August, 1986 about 6.30 a.m. informant the PW-1 found a dead body of an unknown woman lying on her chest in the eastern side of the Chandmari Maidan, Kharagpur, District-Midnapore. It is suspected that she had been killed. One small frock, small pant of a baby and a printed saree was lying near the dead body. A three month old female baby was lying by the side of the dead body, in living condition. Pursuant to the complaint the Sub-Inspector of the local Police Station, viz., Kharagpur (Town) Police Station came to the place and started investigation and did all the formalities regarding preparation of inquest report, seizure of the articles lying and scattered around there. The identity of the dead body could not be traced and/or ascertained until, according to the prosecution, PW-2 reached at the spot around 2 O'clock in the afternoon of the same day and identified the dead body. After investigation the appellant was arrested by the police. The charge was framed under Section 302 of the I.P.C., on 1st March, 1989 to which the appellant pleaded not guilty. The prosecution produced and examined as many as 12 witnesses which include Doctor who held post mortem examination and report, and Investigating Officer. The defence produced none.
(3.) The defence version as it will appear from the answers given by the accused to the questions put under Section 313 of the Cr. P.C., is that the deceased victim was no way related to him nor he was responsible for and/or in anyway involved in killing of the victim.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.