- (1.) THIS appeal is directed against a judgment dated 30th august 2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions judge, Fast Track Court 1, Alipur, South 24 Parganas, in sessions Trial No. 3 (1) of 2003 arising out of Sessions case No. 5 (1) of 2003 convicting the appellants under sections 302/201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal code and an order dated 31st August 2004 by which the appellants were sentenced to imprisonment for life as also to pay a fine of Rs. 4000/- each, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for four months each for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 IPC. They were also sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years as also to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- each, in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for two months for the offence punishable under section 201 read with section 34 of the ipc. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the prosecution case is as follows:-On 12th July 2002 dead body of an unknown person, packed in a gunny bag, was recovered at the eastern slope of Circular Canal near Gajnabi bridge, at 7. 25 hrs. A g. D. Entry bearing no. 1143 dated 12th July 2002 of ultadanga P. S. was recorded which has been marked ext. 19 and on that basis a case under sections 302 and 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was started against unknown persons for murder of an unknown male, aged about 35 years. The dead body was subsequently identified as that of Mahesh. The evidence led by the prosecution may now be briefly discussed. On 13th July 2002 at about 15. 30 hrs. postmortem of the dead body was conducted by Dr. Pal (P. W. 17 ). A number of lacerated injuries were found on the scalp, cheek, neck and other parts of the body. According to the P. W. 17 "death was due to the effect of asphyxia resulting from compression of neck and ante mortem and homicidal in nature".
(3.) P. W. 5 Jyotsna, wife of the deceased; P. W. 7 Aruna, mother-in-law of the deceased; P. W. 9 Md. Abbas, a worker in a tari shop and P. W. 10 Abdus Sattar, Manager of the tari shop, deposed to have seen the victim Mahesh in the company of the accused persons shortly before the dead body of the victim was recovered by the police. Evidence of P. W. 5 Jyotsna is as follows:- "on the day just preceding the day of Rathjatra at about 12 O'clock at noon Budha @ Baddy came toour house and called my husband. My husband went out. Outside my father's house, my husband and buddha @ Baddy were talking. He was demanding money from my husband and on this issue Buddha was expressing his anger during talk. My husband couldnot give money to Buddha. I asked both my husband and Buddha @ Baddy whether they would take tea. Both refused the offer of tea. Buddha @ Baddy told that the matter would be settled in night. He left the place after saying it. My husband came back to the house. On being asked by me my husband told me that I would not understand the matter between him and Buddha. In the night at about 11 P. M. on that day while my parents and husband and myself were taking supper, Buddha and Sanu came to our house and called my husband. My husband was reluctant to go out. When they were persistently asking and pressing my husband to go with them at last my husband had to go out with them though he was not willing to do so. Thereafter my husband did not come back to our house. ";