SWAPAN ROY Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been directed against judgment and orders of conviction and sentence dated 24.04.2014 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Re-designated) Court, Bankura in Sessions Trial No. 04(01)13 arising out of Sessions Case No. 06(05)12. In the said case three accused persons namely, Swapan Roy (appellant herein), Nitya Gopal Roy and Fatik Roy were made accused and a charge under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short I.P.C.) was framed against all of them.

(2.) During trial, state respondent as prosecution examined fourteen witnesses namely, Soutam Mandal (elder brother of the injured victim) as PW 1, Somnath Mallick (declared hostile) as PW 2, Bhaskar Chandra Mandal (cousin of PW 1 and victim PW 11) as PW 3, Biswanath Mandal (owner of car by which victim was taken to hospital) as PW 4, Swajal Kumar Mandal as PW 5, Tapan Bauri as PW 6, Swapan Bauri as PW 7, Genubala Mandal (mother of injured victim and informant) as PW 8, Anup Kumar Mandal as PW 9, Biswarup Karmakar as PW 10, injured victim Krishna Mandal as PW 11, first Investigating Police Officer (in short first I.O.) subInspector Gokul Chandra Ruidas as PW 12, Dr. Ganesh Kumar (Neuro-surgeon) as PW 13 and second Investigating Police Officer (in short second I.O.) sub-Inspector Soumitra Rajak as PW 14. In addition to the oral evidence of said fourteen witnesses the prosecution also adduced documentary evidence such as written complaint (written FIR) as exhibit- 1, signature of informant (PW 8) on exhibit- 1 as exhibit- 1/1, endorsement on exhibit- 1 as exhibit- 1/2, formal FIR as exhibit- 2, hand sketch map with index of the place of occurrence (in short P.O.) as exhibit- 3, one discharge certificate of PW 11 dated 29.06.2010 as exhibit- 4 and another discharge certificate of PW 11 dated 29.09.2010 as exhibit- 5. Accused persons were examined under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short Cr.P.C.). They did not adduce evidence. In the impugned judgment accused Swapan Roy (appellant herein) has been convicted of charge under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment. Other two accused persons namely, Nitya Gopal Roy and Fatik Roy have been convicted of an offence punishable under Section 341/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for one month each and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each in default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment of fifteen days. This appeal has been preferred by appellant Swapan Roy alone and not by Nitya Gopal Roy and Fatik Roy.

(3.) The case of the prosecution in the Trial Court is based upon the written FIR lodged by PW 8 at Gangajal Ghati Police Station on 04.06.2010 alleging an occurrence of 30.05.2010 at 08:30 p.m. Initially, the case was started under Sections 341/326/34 of the Indian Penal Code at Gangajal Ghati Police Station and after investigation PW 14 submitted charge-sheet against all the three above named accused persons under Section 341/326/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecution case according to factual matrix in succinct is that PW 11 (injured victim) and his mother (PW 8) were gossiping in the first floor of their house at village Dethol (about 15 km away from police station) on 30.05.2010 at about 08:30 p.m. (night). At that time PW 2 called PW 11 when PW 11 went out of the building and they were talking in front of their outer door. PW 11 watched it through window of the first floor. Then the appellant came and assaulted on the head of PW 11 by a bamboo stick (lathi) with intention to commit murder when other two accused persons were instructing the appellant from a distance of 25-30 cubits of PW 11 to kill PW 11. The PW 8 came to the ground floor and found PW 11 with bleeding injury on his head lying in front of the door. PW 3 came to the road from his house. PW 2 was standing near PW 11. The PW 8 and others shouted. Accused persons took to their heel. PW 2 lifted PW 11 when PW 11 started vomiting. The PW 11 was taken to Durgapur Main Hospital first where no accommodation for treatment of such patient was found and then to Bidhannagar Vivekananda Hospital at Durgapur where he was treated medically as he was fighting with death. Stating such reasons the delay in lodging FIR has been explained.