KAILASH MARJIT Vs. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against a judgment and order of conviction dated 7th May 2008 and sentence dated 13th May 2008 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Lalbag, Murshidabad in Sessions Trial No. 1/Jan/06 : Sessions Serial No. 11/05, thereby convicting the appellant under Sections 302 and 201 of the Penal Code and sentencing him to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- , in default to suffer imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 302 and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default to suffer imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 201, both the sentences having to run concurrently.

(2.) On 19th August 2004 at about 20:50 hours, PW 2 lodged a First Information Report with the Nabagram Police Station. He stated that on 17th August 2004 at about 22:00 hours his daughter Mou prepared his bed and went to her room at the first floor to sleep. On the next morning he woke up from his bed and could not find his daughter. They all searched for her. On 19th August 2004 at about 12 noon PW 2 went to the Police Station and lodged a missing diary. The villagers asked him to see if his daughter had written any letter. His wife (PW 12) recovered five letters from a bag. PW 4, the niece of PW 2, on seeing such letters identified the handwriting to be that of the appellant. PW 4, the victim and the appellant used to study in the same school at Nimgram. After reading those letters, PW 2 came to know that the appellant and the victim had a love affair. They even had physical relationship and the victim became pregnant from such relationship. The appellant asked the victim to meet him at 10 O' clock on Tuesday. The fact about affair was known to PW 10 and some other villagers. PW 2 further stated that in the meantime at about 16:30 hours he received an information from the villagers that a dead body was floating in the pond of one Sunil Chattaraj. He went there and found the dead body of his daughter floating in the pond. He identified her by seeing her clothes. The dead body was brought to the bank of the pond. The victim's tongue and eyes had come out and there was a black spot on the throat. He also found a bag tied with nylon rope to her waist. On opening the bag a few bricks were found inside. It became clear to him that the appellant called his daughter at 10 p.m. and murdered her and then drowned the dead body in the pond by tying a bag full of bricks to her waist.

(3.) Investigation commenced. PW 18, the Investigating Officer held an inquest over the dead body on 19th August 2004 at the bank of the pond in the presence of witnesses PWs 2, 3 and 10. He found that the tongue and the eyes of the victim had come out. There was a mark of rope seen around the neck and throat. The dead body was found decomposed with a white bag full of bricks tied with the nylon rope to her waist. On preliminary investigation, PW 18 learnt that the appellant had a love affair with the victim. A few letters written by the appellant were recovered from the house of the victim. When the victim became pregnant as a result of their relationship, the appellant asked her to abort the foetus. It also appeared from one of his letters that the appellant had asked the victim to meet him at 10 p.m. on 17th August 2004. Nobody saw her after the date fixed for such meeting. A post mortem examination was done over the dead body by PW 19 on 20th August 2004. He opined that the victim was murdered by strangulation (asphyxia). A charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant.