PALTU SHIL Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been directed against judgment dated 24.04.2006 and orders of conviction and sentence dated 24.04.2006 and 25.04.2006 respectively passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Jalpaiguri in Sessions Case No. 76/03 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 11/2003 convicting the appellant Paltu Shil @ Roy under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/ - in default R.I. for six months.

(2.) Contending inter alia appellant has contended that impugned judgment is perverse and bad in law and that learned Court below ought to have held that it was impossible for the informant (PW 1), wife of the deceased to identify the assailant of the deceased in the fateful dark rainy evening and that motive of the appellant was not proved and that the seizure of knife and wearing apparel of accused was not proved and that the learned Judge in Trial Court erred in law and fact for which the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside and appellant deserves acquittal.

(3.) At the time of hearing this appeal learned Counsel for the appellant has advanced arguments that prosecution case against the appellant was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and so the appellant deserves acquittal. His alternative further arguments is that if the entire allegations are taken on its face value, in spite of that the conviction under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code cannot sustain in view of the fact that what has happened as alleged, if at all, has happened in a spur of the moment and such alleged incident was not premeditated or pre -planned and as such, it falls within the ambit of Sec. 304 Part - II of the Indian Penal Code. In support of his arguments he relied upon two decisions reported in, (2009) 2 CCr LR (SC) 229 and, (2010) 2 CCr LR (Cal) 773.