SAMBHUNATH MAITY @ SAMBHU Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dtd. 27th August, 2010/31st August, 2010 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Tamluk, Purba Medinipur in Sessions Trial No. 01(1)10 (Sessions Case No. 288(12)09) convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Sections 498A/302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months more for the offence punishable under Sec. 498A IPC and to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months more for the offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code; both the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellant is the effect that he married the deceased namely, Kajal Dandapat 8-9 years ago. The appellant used to regularly assault his wife. On 03.09.2009, the appellant had a quarrel with his wife and assaulted her with a boti and smothered her resulting in her death. Written complaint was lodged by the father of the deceased namely, Kanai Dandapat (PW1) resulting in registration of Chandipur Police Station Case No. 180 of 2009 dtd. 03.09.2009 under Sections 498A/302 IPC against the appellant and other in-laws. In course of investigation, PW15 went to the place of occurrence and seized a boti, a wooden battam as well as blood stained soil under seizure list. Appellant and other accused persons were arrested and charge-sheet was filed. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions and transferred to the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Tamluk, Purba Medinipur for trial and disposal. Charges were framed under Sections 498A/302 IPC against the appellant and other in-laws. The accused persons pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 17 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. The defence of the accused persons was one of innocence and false implication. In conclusion of trial, the trial Judge by the impugned judgment and order dtd. 27th August, 2010/31st August, 2010 convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid. By the selfsame judgement and order, other accused persons were acquitted.

(3.) Mr. Mainak Bakshi, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the evidence of the minor son (PW5) is unreliable as he is a tutored witness. Appellant was not present at the place of occurrence and the opinion of the doctor with regard to the cause of death is unclear. Without prejudice to the aforesaid, learned counsel argued the incident occurred in the course of a quarrel and the appellant had no intention to murder his wife. Hence, the conviction may be altered from one under Sec. 302 IPC to Sec. 304 Part I of the Indian Penal Code.