AUKAT ALI GAYEN Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Three appeals have been filed by the respective appellants on the self-same grounds and since the facts and evidence as well as the legal positions are common, it would be appropriate to pass a common judgment for the three appeals. Challenging the legal pregnability and the validity of the judgment and order of conviction recorded by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 3rd Court, Diamond Harbour in ST No. 9(7)04/ST No. 5(8)05 and GR case no. 496 of 2004, the appellant has preferred this appeal. The main grievances of the appellants are such that the learned court below failed to appreciate the evidence and legal aspects of the matter in its proper perspective.

(2.) The appellants contended that they have been convicted only under Section 412 IPC and the case under Section 395/397 read with Indian Explosives Act have been ended in acquittal. At the time of argument, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant contended that there was a T.I. Parade in respect of the articles but the witnesses who had identified their articles claiming to be their own has given a sommersault at the time of deposition. The witness who has identified the silver made necklace has stated before the court that his wrist watch was stolen. At the same time, other witnesses who had stated that his wrist watch (HMT) were snatched away by the miscreants before the court but he identified the silver made necklace as of his own. This point has not been covered up by the prosecution. Naturally, chance of doubt is there.

(3.) In such circumstances, the impugned order of conviction is to be interfered with. Accordingly, the criminal appeals being CRA 183 of 2007, CRA 210 of 2007 and CRA 132 of 2009 are hereby allowed. The convict appellants who are in custody be released forthwith if they are not connected with any other case.