APARESH GUCHHAIT Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two brothers Aparesh Guchhait and Animesh Guchhait, appellants herein, have been put on trial for a murder of a nine-year old paralytic boy, a distant cousin of theirs.

(2.) Genesis of the prosecution case can be traced back on 27.04.2004 when around 6 a.m. P.W. 2, Malati Guchhait, mother of the victim found that her son Chiranjit, who was sitting at the Tulsimancha (a small altar where the sacred 'Tulsi Plant' had been kept in front of the house) had gone missing. Father of the child P.W. 1, Rampada Guchhait was away from home for business purposes. He was informed of the said incident. After he returned home he along with local people started searching for the boy. In the meantime while shuffling through the books of the young boy a letter demanding Rs.2,00,000/- purportedly written by a dacoit Sultan Singh was found. As per the letter P.W. 1 along with his relations and local people proceeded to keep the ransom money at a place behind Mangaldeep lodge at Gadiara, Howrah. They kept watch for sometime but no one came to collect the money. Accordingly they returned home with the money. It is alleged while going to the spot, P.W. 1 and others had requested the brothers to accompany them but they refused to do so and Aparesh had left the spot. On the next day Animesh informed P.W. 2, Malati Guchhait as well as her brother P.W. 3, Deepak Koley @ Manik Koley, maternal uncle of the boy that P.W. 1, Rampada should go alone and keep the ransom money at the spot. After scrutinising the ransom note, doubts occurred in the mind of P.W. 1 and others that it may have been written by Aparesh. On the night of 29th April, 2004 P.W. 1, Rampada lodged First Information Report resulting in registration of Tamluk Police Station Case No.69/04 dated 29.04.2004 under Section 364/364A of the Indian Penal Code. As doubts had cropped up in the mind of the witnesses that the handwriting in the ransom note may be that of Aparesh, exercise books with the handwritings of the said accused were seized. On the next day local people complained that a foul smell was coming from the Godown of Chandi Charan Guchchhait, father of the appellants. Keys to the godown was taken from him and upon opening the godown the body of the deceased was recovered. Aparesh and Animesh were arrested in connection with this case and charged with the offences punishable under Sections 364, 364A, 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In the course of investigation opinion of the handwriting expert confirmed the suspicion that the ransom note had indeed been written by Aparesh. Charges were framed against the aforesaid accused persons under the aforesaid sections and they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) In the course of trial prosecution examined 21 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents. In conclusion of trial the Trial Judge by a Judgment and order dated 29.04.2013 and 30.04.2013 convicted the appellants for commission of offence punishable under Sections 364A/34, 302/34 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and directed that they shall suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/-in default imprisonment for two years for commission of offence under Section 364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and also suffer life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5,000/- in default another imprisonment for the period of two years each for commission of offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer imprisonment for three years with fine of Rs.1,000/- in default S.I. for six months for commission of offence under Section 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, all the sentences to run concurrently.