The High Court found significant contradictions and investigative lapses, leading to the acquittal of the appellants.
In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of Bishnupada Choudhury and others, who were previously sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment for alleged assault leading to the death of Madhusudan Garai. The decision, delivered by Justice Prasenjit Biswas, highlighted numerous inconsistencies and contradictions in the prosecution's evidence, as well as serious investigative lapses that undermined the credibility of the case.
The case arose from an incident on June 11, 1985, where the victim was allegedly beaten by villagers during a meeting at Sripur Gangcha Club Ghar. The prosecution's case heavily relied on the testimonies of the victim’s wife and other relatives, who claimed to have witnessed the assault. However, the High Court found these testimonies riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions.
Justice Biswas noted that the conduct of the prosecution witnesses was unnatural, as they failed to take immediate steps to secure medical assistance for the victim, despite witnessing the assault. The judgment pointed out the shifting stands of the witnesses regarding the lodging of the FIR and the identification of the assailants, which raised doubts about the authenticity of the prosecution's narrative.
The Court also criticized the investigation for failing to seize crucial physical evidence from the scene and for not examining key witnesses. It was highlighted that no independent local witnesses were brought forward to corroborate the prosecution's version, despite the incident occurring in a public place.
The High Court emphasized that in the absence of strong and clear corroboration, it would be unsafe to convict the appellants. The judgment stressed the importance of independent corroboration when the prosecution's case is based on the testimonies of interested witnesses, particularly when those testimonies are inconsistent.
Ultimately, the Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the trial court's judgment and acquitting the appellants. It directed the release of the appellants from their bail bonds, unless required in connection with another case.
Bottom Line:
Conviction cannot be sustained if the prosecution case suffers from material inconsistencies, contradictions, lack of independent corroboration, and investigative lapses.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 147, 149, 304 Part I; Evidence Act, 1872 Section 145; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Sections 161, 437A (Corresponding to Sections 354, 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023).
Bishnupada Choudhury v. State of West Bengal, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc id # 2853193
