CHANDRAMA PRASAD CHAMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellants together with others were tried by the Sessions Judge of Nadia and a jury on a charge of a dacoity. The jury by a unanimous verdict have found the Appellants guilty of that charge and the learned Judge has sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years.

(2.) The case for the prosecution briefly is as follows: In the early hours of January 31, 1949, two dacoities were committed in the railway quarters at Chandmari. One of the dacoities was committed in the block occupied by one Binay and the other in the block occupied by one Sushil. The dacoits carried away certain articles from these two different quarters and went away. They were not recognised by any of the inmates of the railway quarters. A telephonic message was sent to Bijpur and the officer in charge of Bijpur set out with some constables at about 3-30 a.m. from the Kanchrapara railway station. As he was proceeding, he met some of the dacoits and arrested them and prepared a search-list of certain articles which were found in their possession. This search-list is Ex. 7. In the meantime, another telephonic message was received by Surendra Nath Das, prosecution witness No. 34, who is "sub-inspector of Chakdah police, from the railway station at about 4-30 a.m. He made a general diary entry of this message and then went to Chandmari in the morning to the houses or the blocks where the dacoities took place. There a written report was made over to him by Bibhuti Bhusan Guha, prosecution witness No. 1 and together with this report was a list of articles stolen, which is Ex. 1. Investigation proceeded and as a result thereof the Appellants and others were sent up for trial. The defence of the Appellants was that they were not guilty and that they had nothing to do with the dacoities. The Appellants Chandrama Prasad and Ram Raj state that they were returning from a feast and they had been arrested for no crime committed by them. They denied that they were with the other persons who were arrested at or about that time. The Appellant Manilal works in the Medical College Hospital. He was arrested there. He says that he was on duty at the Medical College Hospital and that he had nothing to do with the dacoities.

(3.) I shall endeavour to place briefly the main points upon which the prosecution relied to establish the guilt of the three Appellants. As against Chandrama, the evidence relied upon relates to the alleged finding of certain articles upon his person. That is one piece of evidence relied upon and the other piece of evidence relied upon is the foot-print on one of the boxes which the dacoits had taken away. The foot-print tallied with the foot-print of Chandrama Prasad. These are the two circumstances upon which the prosecution relied so far as Chandrama Prasad is concerned. As regards the Appellant Ram Raj the prosecution relied upon nothing else but the alleged finding of the articles upon him. So far as the third Appellant Manilal is concerned there is no evidence that any article which was taken away by the dacoits was found upon him, but it is said