KUSHAPATI MAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.01.2005 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Bankura in Sessions Trial No. 3(4) of 1999 arising out of Sessions Case no. 1(9) of 1998 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year more.

(2.) Prosecution case against the appellant is to the effect that on 15.8.1996 at 3.30 p.m. the appellant started uttering filthy words in front of the house of his brother Ajit Mal and threatened that he would kill Tarun Mal, son of Ajit Mal on that day. Thereafter, he proceeded towards the field where Tarun was gazing the buffalo. Hearing such news, P.W. 1 Ajit Kapuri father-in-law of Tarun and his mother Sibani Mal, the victim, also followed the appellant. When they reached the pond of Melabandh, the appellant suddenly struck Sibani on the neck and head and Sibani fell down and suffered blood injury and expired. Tarun Mal carried the dead body to the residence. Over the issue Ajit Kapri (P.W 1) lodged complaint with Barjora P.S resulting in registration of Barjora P.S case no. 43/96 dated 15.8.96 under section 302 IPC. In conclusion of investigation charge sheet was filed under the aforesaid section against the appellant and the case was committed to the court of sessions and transferred to the Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Bankura for trial and disposal. Charge was framed under section 302 IPC and the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In course of trial, prosecution examined 19 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. The defence of the appellants was one of innocence and false implication. The specific defence of the appellant is that the victim was killed by Tarun in his residence and he had been falsely implicated due to long standing land dispute between himself and his brother Ajit Mal, P.W 11. To probabilise such case he examined two witnesses, D.W 1 and 2 namely wife of his elder brother and his own wife and exhibited some documents. In conclusion of trial the trial judge by judgement and order dated 18.1.2005 convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid.

(3.) Mr. Bakshi appearing for the appellant submits that the daughter of the appellant died on the self same date and her dead body had been brought back by Tarun Mal (P.W 2). As a result the appellant suffered from sudden insanity as he laboured under the suspect that Tarun had committed the murder of his daughter. Accordingly, he set out to kill Tarun and as the victim intervened, he had assaulted her. It is further submitted that there was enmity between the parties. Hence, the appeal is liable to be allowed.