LAXMI CHAKRABORTY Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above three appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 14. 6. 2005 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in Sessions Case No. 174 (WT/a)/2004. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned Sessions Judge convicted Smt. Laxmi Das, Smt. Laxmi Chakraborty and Sri Ranjit Paul for the offences under Sections 364/511 IPC, and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years each. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the accused-appellants aforesaid have preferred these appeals on the ground that the learned Sessions Judge committed error by convicting them without sufficient substantive evidence. As the above set of appeals have arisen out of the same judgment and involve the same questions of fact and law, with the consent of the learned counsels appearing for both the parties, I propose to dispose of the above three appeals by this common judgment and order.

(2.) THE prosecution case, in brief, may be stated as follows:-Master Subhankar Sarkar (PW 3), a student of Children Montessori Centre, office lane on 6. 7. 04 at 11-30 a. m. after the school hour was waiting inside the school campus to be picked up by his parents. Taking this opportunity, the accused-appellant Smt. Laxmi Das entered the school premises and attempted to take him away by pulling his hand, to which the PW3 resisted by crying. Hearing his cry, the school teachers, namely, Smt. Tultul Chakraborty (PW 1), Smt. Chandana Deb (PW 2) rushed to the PW 3 and rescued him from the said Smt. Laxmi Das, who was detained in the school. On being questioned by the teachers as to why she tried to take that boy, Smt. Laxmi Das gave contradictory replies stating at one point of time that she was the maid servant working in the house of PW 3 and at another point of time that she was the aunt of PW 3. But Subhankar refuted her claim. On being informed, Sri Prabir Sarkar (PW 4), the father of PW 3, arrived in the school to clarify that the said woman was not known to him. On being further interrogated, Smt. Laxmi Das disclosed that she had two other companions, namely, Smt. Laxmi Chakraborty and her husband, Sri Ranjit Paul, who were waiting outside. Accordingly, the Police being informed, the said Smt. Laxmi Das was taken to the Police Station. PW 4, Sri Prabir Sarkar lodged the FIR with the Police, which was registered as West Agartala PS Case No. 71 of 2004 under Sections 364/511 IPC. During the investigation, the Police arrested the other two co-accused, namely, Smt. Laxmi Chakraborty, and her husband Sri Ranjit Paul. Police forwarded Smt. Laxmi Das and Smt. Laxmi Chakraborty to the learned Magistrate for recording their confessional statement. Smt. Laxmi Chakraborty declined to make confessional statement, while the confessional statement of Smt. Laxmi Das was recorded by the learned Magistrate. At the close of the investigation, Police submitted chargesheet against the said accused persons for committing the offence under Sections 364/511 IPC. The offence being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Court of learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges under Sections 364/511/34 IPC against the accused-appellants, to which they pleaded not guilty. In order to bring home to the guilt to the accused person, the prosecution examined as many as ten witnesses including the Investigating Officer. Considering the evidence on record, the learned Sessions Judge found the accused-appellants guilty of the offence under Sections 364/511ipc. Accordingly, they were convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.

(3.) IN order to appreciate the argument advanced on behalf of the parties, I would like to scrutinize and briefly recapitulate the evidence on record as follows:-Smti Tultul Chakraborty (PW 1), who was a teacher of the said school stated that, on 6. 7. 04, after the school hour, at about 11-30 a. m. , she saw accused Smt. Laxmi Das trying to take away the PW 3, who was waiting for his parents. According to this witness, as the PW 3 refused to go with Smt. Laxmi Das, she (PW 1), suspecting some foul play asked the woman about her identity, who disclosing her name as Smt. Laxmi Das told her that she was the maid servant of the PW3, but the father of PW 3, who arrived in the school, clarified that she was not his maid servant. On being informed, the Police arrived there and took the said woman to the Police Station. This witness further stated that the said woman had disclosed that she had two other companions, namely, Smt. Laxmi Chakraborty and her husband Sri Ranjit Paul, who were waiting outside in a rickshaw. This witness clearly stated that she did not see Smt. Laxmi Das and her husband Sri Ranjit Paul. From the evidence of PW 1, it appears that Smt. Laxmi Das tried to take away the PW 3 from the school premises. The statement of Smt. Laxmi Das regarding involvement of Smt. Laxmi Chakraborty and her husband was the statement of a co-accused. I propose to discuss the evidentiary value of the statement made by the co-accused in the later part of this judgment. Smt. Chandana Deb, another teacher of the school, deposing as PW 2 while supporting the evidence of PW 1 stated that a woman who disclosed her name as Smt. Laxmi Das tried to take away PW 3 from the school premises, and that the said woman being questioned disclosed that two of her companions, (one female and one male) were waiting outside the school. Master Subhankar Sarkar, a six years old student of the said school, deposing as PW 3 stated that the lady named Smt. Laxmi Das tried to forcibly take him away from the school premises, but due to the timely intervention of the school teachers, the woman could be detained. He identified the said woman as Smt. Laxmi Das in the Court, during the trial. According to PW 4, Sri Prabir Sarkar, i. e. the father of PW 3, Smt. Laxmi Das was found trying to kidnap his son. This witness lodged the FIR with the Police, which was exhibited as Ext. 1. Sri Durganath Sarma (PW 5) stated that he heard that the son of PW 4 was tried to be kidnapped by a woman. Smt. Rupali Sutradhar, another teacher of the said school deposing as PW 6, in tune with the evidence of witnesses aforesaid stated that the accused Smt. Laxmi Das tried to kidnap the PW 3 and that on being interrogated, she disclosed that two other persons were waiting outside the school. From the above evidence, it appears that none of the said witnesses saw the other two persons, who were alleged to be waiting outside the school premises. PW 7 Sri Sanjay Biswas, Police Officer, stated that PW 4 lodged the FIR (Ext. 2 ). Sri Durgaprasad Roy, the Investigating Officer in this case deposing as PW 8 stated that a woman, who identified herself as Smt. Laxmi Das was detained by the public in the school premises and that she was taken to the Police Station. According to PW 8, Sri Sukumar Shil (PW 10) disclosed about the involvement of the accused Smt. Laxmi Chakraborty and Sri Ranjit Paul. The I. O. further stated that he had no information regarding the motive of the said kidnappers. Sri Udit Chowdhury, Learned CJM, West Tripura (PW9) recorded the confessionsl statement of Smt. Laxmi Das. He has exhibited the confessional statement as Ext. 5. On careful perusal of the confessional statement, it appears that on being questioned the accused Smt. Laxmi Das repeatedly stated that she did not commit offence. In view of her statement aforesaid, I do not understand as to why the learned Magistrate, in spite of repeated pleading of innocence made by the accused, proceeded to record the same. As the accused denied to have committed any offence, the learned Magistrate should have stopped to record the confessional statement. The following questions, which, among others, were put to the accused and the answers given thereof will indicate the perfunctory manner in which the confessional statement was recorded:-