HARADHAN LET Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the appellant/convict being aggrieved by the judgment dated 18th April, 2012 delivered by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track, 3rd Court, Rampurhat, Birbhum in Sessions Trial No. 41(11)/11 arising out of Sessions Case no. 129/11 sentencing the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, which is set out hereunder:

(2.) Mr. Md. Salahuddin, learned Counsel for the appellant argued that there was delay in lodging the First Information Report. From evidence of the Investigating Officer, P.W. 15 it would reveal that first complaint was suppressed. The seizure of the alleged offending weapon was not made properly and even seized alamat was not placed during trial before seizure witness. Therefore, reliance on the alleged alamat exhibited as offending weapon would have become improper. He further argued that the motive behind the alleged crime has not been proved beyond all reasonable doubt, since the prosecution did not produce any evidence to show that the victim was a tax collector. Learned Counsel for the appellant further submitted that though the unfortunate death to the victim was a deep blow to his parents, but the appellant was innocent and as the prosecution failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the appellant and none else was involved with the alleged crime of murder. Therefore, he prayed for setting aside the judgment of conviction in allowing the appeal.

(3.) Mr. Saibal Bapuli, learned Additional Public Prosecutor relied upon the evidence of alleged eye witness, P.W. 7, P.W. 10 and the statements recorded by the learned Judicial Magistrate under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure apart from alleged extra judicial confession as available from P.W. 3 and P.W. 4 submitted that there was no legal reason to interfere with the judgment of conviction. He also relied upon the following decisions: