BAPI MUKHERJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal the judgment dated September 30, 2004 and the order of sentence dated October 1, 2004 as passed in Sessions Trial No. 1(July) 2003 arising out of Sessions Case No. 67 of 2003 by learned Judge, 3 Bench, City Sessions Court at Calcutta has been assailed. By the impugned judgment learned trial court in the said sessions trial found the present appellant guilty under Sec. 302 of the Penal Code, 1860 and thus sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay fine of Rs.5000.00 in default to suffer imprisonment for two years more. The appellant felt aggrieved and thus preferred the instant appeal.

(2.) For effective disposal of the instant appeal the facts leading to initiation of the aforesaid sessions trial is required to be dealt with in a nutshell.

(3.) One Pradip Kumar Pradhan, son of Nalini Kanta Pradhan of village Beltola, P.O. Kalisabhanga, P.S. Kanthi, District Purba Midnapur gave an oral statement before the S.I. Haridas Ganguly of Kolkata Police which was reduced into writing by the said S.I. of police and in his statement the de-facto complainant stated that since 1998 he was working as a manager of 'Hotel Penguin ' (hereinafter referred to as the said hotel) at 18 Jadunath Dey Road, Kolkata where two more managers, two sweepers and five hotel boys were employed. It was his further version that on 6/2/2003 at about 7 : 50 am when he and his colleague Saibal Jana were working in the reception, two persons entered into the said hotel and asked for a room to which the said employees of the said hotel allotted them room no. 102 (hereinafter referred to as the 'P.O. room '). At the time of booking of the said room, one person amongst two having bulky weight and medium complexion wrote his name in the hotel register as 'Motilal Saw ' (Shaw) of 42 B Motilal Lane, and also entered the name of the other person as 'Suman Behari ' in the said register and thereafter both the boarders entered into Room No. 102 of the said hotel and at about 1 : 30pm both of them went outside and came back soon with a bottle wrapped with newspaper which according to the de facto complainant might be a bottle of liquor. It was the further version of the de-facto complainant before the SI, Haridas Ganguly that at about 4 : 30 pm the bulky person i.e. Motilal Saw (Shaw) went out of the hotel and thereafter he did not return. On the next day i.e. 7/2/2003 a boy of the said hotel as usual knocked on the door of the said P.O. room but he got no response from the boarders of the said P.O. room and when the de facto complainant made an attempt to contact with the boarders of the said P.O. room at about 9 : 30 am through intercom he also got no response. He thereafter sent the hotel boy to knock at the door of the said P.O. room but getting no response from inside, the de-facto complainant along with the two other employees of the said hotel entered into the said P.O. room by opening the lock of the said room by a duplicate key and found that the said room is in dark while the ceiling fan of the said P.O. room was rotating. It has been further stated that after illuminating the lights of the P.O. room, he noticed that the thin person viz.; 'Suman Behari ' was lying on the bed in upside down position and by the side of his head, the white bed sheet had turned red on account of oozing of blood. It has also been stated by the de-facto complainant that he thereafter informed the incident at Bowbazar Police Station. In his version, the de facto complainant expressed his view that Motilal Saw(Shaw) murdered Suman Behari. He thereafter stated that inspite of vigorous search he could not find out the original key of the said P.O. room with which one brass plate has been attached on which the name of the said hotel and its room number have been inscripted in English.