BISWAJIT MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant questions his conviction under Section 302 of the Penal Code and the consequent sentence primarily on the ground that there was no material discovered against him and his conviction is founded on the alleged confession attributed to him by the police.

(2.) The prosecution case, as it was unfurled in course of the trial, was that shortly after 6.30 am on December 6, 2003 the appellant went to the police station and claimed that he had killed his wife and immediately upon the appellant realising that his wife was dead, he rushed to the police station to report the matter. The further case sought to be made out by the prosecution was that the appellant was taken by the police personnel to the appellant's house; that the appellant's room was locked and the key to such lock was obtained from the appellant to enter the room; that the dead body of the appellant's wife was discovered on the bed; and, that the appellant apparently pointed out the offending weapon, a wooden log said to be the foot of a cot, which was brought out from under the bed.

(3.) One of the grounds urged on behalf of the appellant to question the prosecution version is that the relevant GD entry recorded that the appellant had come to the police station wearing only a lungi and that his upper body was bare, but in course of the evidence at the trial several witnesses claimed that the appellant took out the key to his room from a pocket (some even mentioned that it was from what is commonly known as a book-pocket and is generally placed towards the top left of a man's shirt). The appellant also contends that the location of the offending weapon was not recorded in any statement attributed to the appellant and merely because the appellant may have taken out the log of wood or the foot of the cot in the presence of several others would not attract the rule embodied in Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872.