SWAPAN MOLLA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dtd. 13/2/2004 passed in Sessions Case No. 12(6) of 2002 (Sessions Trial No. 4(7) of 2002 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000.00, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for three months more.

(2.) The appellant has been charged as follows :

(3.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellant is to the effect that on 16/1/1998 at 1:00 p.m., Subhas Chandra Garai (P.W. 1) had returned home from his sweetmeat shop. He found his younger brother, Jagabandhu (P.W. 3) had not returned after watering potato plants in the field. The younger sister Minati @ kali was sent to serve lunch to his younger brother who was still working in the field. After sometime, Jagabandhu returned home and informed others he had not met Minati but Minati did not return home. Haradhan Garai (P.W.2), another brother of Minati, went out to search for her. After sometime he returned and informed that Minati had been killed. Appellant had smeared vermilion on her forehead at the 'shivasthan' and had taken her into the jungle. There he slit her throat and fled away. Some of the villagers saw the appellant fleeing away after the murder and informed Haradhan. The latter found the body of Minati lying supine with her throat slit. Appellant was not found at his home. It is further alleged appellant had been disturbing Minati and had proposed to marry her. Minati refused. As a result, he took her to the jungle and killed her. F.I.R. being Onda P.S. Case No. 4/1998 dtd. 16/1/1998 under Sec. 302 IPC was registered against the appellant on the written complaint of P.W. 1. Police went to the place of occurrence and prepared inquest report. Appellant was arrested and on his showing his bloodstained wearing apparels and weapon of offence, that is, razor recovered. Charge-sheet was filed and the appellant was charged, as aforesaid. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 13 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents.