RAHIM BOX MOLLAH Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals preferred by three Appellants who were convicted in the Sessions Trial Case No. 6(1) of 1988 by Shri S.K. Kar, learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Alipore, under Sec. 302 read with Sec. 34 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000.00 each in default to suffer R.I. 3 years each, further convicted under Sec. 392 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 3,000.00 in default R.I. for 2 years. The learned Sessions Judge also convicted all the three Appellants under Sec. 392 Indian Penal Code but did not pass any separate sentence for such conviction. Admittedly by an order passed in Criminal Revision filed at the instance of the State of West Bengal under Sec. 220 of the Code of Criminal Procedure trial of the 2 Sessions Cases, namely, S.C. No. 20 (6)/88 was held jointly with S.C. No. 26(12)/ 87. After clubbing together both the Sessions cases, Sessions Trial No. 6(1)/88 was held wherein the learned Sessions Judge passed the order of conviction and sentence as noted above.

(2.) Rohit Kumar Gupta (p.w. 18) come to Burtola P.S. on March 3, 1987 and lodged one G.D., alleging that on March 2, 1987 at about 7.30 a.m. his driver Sew Dhari Pandit took out taxi No. WMT 42 owned by Sri Gupta for plying the same on hire, but the driver did not return along with the taxi even at the time of lodging the F.I.R. on the early hours of March 3, 1987 at about 1.30 hrs. Shibu Mondal (P.W. 22) came to Park Street P.S. and lodged F.I.R. alleging that on March 2, 1987 at about 10.00 hrs. he went to attend, the marriage ceremony of a person at 17/1 A, Alipore Road also to take photograph of the marriage party. At about 01.00 hrs. on March 3, 1987 he along with Sri Gopal Banerjee (P.W. 19) and Sri Nakuleswar Chatterjee (P.W. 20) engaged a Taxi No. WMT 42 from Alipore Road to reach their houses. In such taxi there were two other unknown passengers excluding the driver and helper. The taxi started from, in front of 17/1 A -Alipore Road. The two other passengers on reaching their destination got down from the taxi and the informant was proceeding in the taxi towards his house when the driver stopped the taxi at the crossing of Camac Street and Ho Chi Min Sarani. At that time, the witness was sitting at the rear seat of taxi with two other persons who suddenly started abusing him and those persons asked him to handover the camera with flash gun which the informant had in a bag, wrist -watch and cash of Rs. 130.00. When the informant was hesitating those articles was snatched away by these persons and thereafter they decamped with those articles in the said taxi. There is yet another F.I.R. which was lodged by Ratan Lai Mukherjee, Sub -Inspector of Police attached to Garden Reach P.S. in the Port Division (not examined in connection with Sessions Trial) lodge information that on March 3, 1987 at about 9.00 hrs. a dead body of an unknown person was found lying by the side of Transport Depot Road near the north western corner of the boundary wall of M/s. Stitcher Company, Transport Depot Road. The F.I.R. further disclosed that later, it came to light that the driver of WMT 42 had been missing since March 2, 1987 and Rabidhari Pandit identified the dead body at Mominpur Police Morgue, Alipore as his missing brother Shibdhari Pandit. So a suo motu F.I.R. was lodged alleging from those facts and circumstances, the police officer reasonably believed that some persons in furtherance of their common intention robbed taxi No. WMT 42 somewhere in the city and committed murder of its driver inside the said taxi No. 42 and they threw the dead body at the Transport Depot Road near the place where the same was found.

(3.) On the basis of the aforesaid information, the police started the 2 cases, one for robbery and the other for murder as indicated above and submitted the chargesheet in the respective cases and pursuant to a direction upon the court below by this Court under Sec. 220 of the Criminal Procedure Code, both the cases were tried together by the Additional Sessions Judge, who after considering the evidence on record and the other relevant facts and circumstances, came to a finding that the prosecution successfully brought home the charges levelled against the accused/Appellants and thereafter convicted and sentenced the accused/Appellants as above.