KARTICK PAUL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28th February/2nd March, 2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 7th Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas in Sessions Case No. 21 (12) 06 [Sessions Trial No. 1 (5) 07] convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months more.

(2.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellant is to the effect that on 20th July, 2006 at around 10:00 P.M. appellant, Kartick Paul had a dispute with his wife over family matters. Thereafter they went to sleep. In the early hours of the next day there was a hue and cry and the appellant was seen going away from the room. His wife lay in bed with bleeding injuries on her head writhing in pain. She was shifted to hospital. Over the incident, brother of the appellant, Bijoy Krishna Pal (PW5) lodged written complaint resulting in registration of Ashokenagar Police Station Case No. 140 dated 25th July, 2006 under Sections 326/307 IPC. After a lapse of six weeks the victim expired. In conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The case being a sessions triable one was committed to the Court of Sessions and transferred to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, 7th Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas for trial and disposal. Charge was framed under the aforesaid provision of law against the appellant. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the course of trial, prosecution examined 12 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. The appellant during his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure claimed he was not present at the place of occurrence and had gone to Burdwan in connection with his work. However, no witness was examined to probabilise such plea of alibi. In conclusion of trial, the trial Judge by the impugned judgement and order dated 28th February/2nd March, 2013 convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid.

(3.) Mr. Sabyasachi Chatterjee, learned advocate appearing for the appellant as well as Ms. Meenal Sinha, learned Amicus Curiae, argued that the prosecution case has not been proved as the witnesses who saw the appellant leave the room on the fateful day are untrustworthy. PW1 did not mention the source of light by which he saw the appellant while the evidence of PWs 2 and 3, the minor sons of the appellant, appear to be tutored. Evidences of other witnesses suffer from various contradictions and/or embellishments. What was the weapon of offence is unclear and has not been established in the instant case. Post-mortem report was not exhibited and the cause of death has also not been established beyond reasonable doubt. They accordingly, prayed for acquittal of the appellant.