BANDHAN MUNDA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 16.01.2013 and 08.04.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1st Court, Jalpaiguri in Sessions Case No. 23 of 1998 convicting the appellant for commission of offence punishable under Section 302/34 and Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- for the commission of offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and further sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, both the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case as alleged against the appellant and co-accused Sukhu Munda (juvenile in conflict with law) is to the effect that one Bikash Ekka, son of Rubi Ekka the victim had an affair with Leo Munda, the sister of the appellant and coaccused Sukhu Munda. As a result, she became pregnant and subsequently committed suicide. Being angry, on 08.06.1997 at around 9.00/10.00 a.m., the appellant and Sukhu Munda went to the house of Rubi Ekka to search her son, Bikash Ekka. But they could not find him. Sukhu Munda started assaulting Rubi Ekka in the first floor of the house while the appellant stood in the ground floor. Thereafter, it is alleged that they dragged away the victim from her house. On the next day in the morning dead body of the victim was found at drain no. 6 of Dalim Kote Division of the Tea estate. Over such issue Ketan Ekka (P.W. 13) lodged written complaint with police station resulting in registration of Mal P.S. Case No. 86/97 dated 09.06.1997 under Sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant and Sukhu Munda. In conclusion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellant and co-accused under sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. As Sukhu Munda was a juvenile in conflict with law, his case was segregated and tried before the Juvenile Justice Board. Charge was framed against the appellant under Section 302/34 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

(3.) In the course of trial, prosecution examined 15 witnesses and exhibited a number of documents to prove its case. The defence of the appellant was one of innocence and false implication.