Calcutta High Court commutes death sentence to 8 murder accused

Must Read

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract....

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish...

Follow us

Case – The state of West Bengal vs. Sri Shyamal Karmakar and ors

Facts

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the appellants forcibly took away Sourav Chowdhury in the night of 4th July 2014 and thereafter committed murder of Sourav Chowdhary near Duttapukur railway track. The further case of the prosecution is that after the commission of such murder, the dead body of Sourav Chowdhary was kept on the railway line in order to conceal such offense and to project a police case to the effect that Sourav Chowdhury died of a railway accident. In fact, the dead body of Sourav Chowdhury was separated in various parts since the dead body was cut into pieces by the movement of railways on such railway track. Sandip Chowdhury, the brother of Sourav Chowdhury reported the matter to police in black and white and accordingly Duttapukur police station case no. 528 of 2014 dated 05.07.2014 under Section 364/302/201 of Indian Penal Code and 25/27 of arms act was started and the investigation ultimately culminated in the filing of charge sheet. One liton Talukdar though named in the charge sheet, could not be apprehended and accordingly, the charge sheet was submitted showing him as an absconder. Sandip Chowdhury witness no. 1 Sandip Chowdhury identified the dead body of his brother Sourav Chowdhury lying on the railway track. He had not seen the accused to take away Sourav Chowdhury. He requested his father to inform the police over the phone. He had no direct and personal knowledge about the occurrence.

Bench

The bench comprising Justice Nadira Patherya and Justice Debi Prosad Dey upheld the conviction of six persons and sentenced them to rigorous life imprisonment.

Judgement

The bench, though upheld conviction of all the accused, except two, answered the death reference in negative by observing thus: “On scrutiny of the materials on record we find that the case under reference is simply a case of retaliation and in that view of this case, we are not in a position to accept the case as one of rarest of rare cases. Admittedly, we answer the death reference in negative.”

The high court also held that one of the convicts, Shyamal Karmakar shall not be released from custody till the completion of his 30-year imprisonment towards the sentence of life imprisonment. The said convict had abused the trial court on the date of delivery of judgment saying that court would not do anything to him though he had committed such an offense.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

Chandigarh Housing Board Is Bound To Implement the Chandigarh Administration’s Policy Decision: Punjab & Haryana High Court

On 15th October 2020, Justices Jaswant Singh and Sant Parkash heard the case of Bhartendu Sood vs Chandigarh Housing Board & Anr., via video-conferencing. Deeming the...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

Uttarakhand High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Relief for the Cancellation of Selection Process

On 13th October 2020, a Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble Justice Lok Pal Singh, heard the case of Ashish Bisht & Anr. v. State...

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Against National Stock Exchange For Lack Of Merit

In the case of A. Kumar v. Financial Intelligence Unit & Ors., A. Kumar filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution...

The Federal Appeals Court Holds Trump’s Diversion of Military Funds To Build the Wall To Be Unlawful

The Federal Appeals Court held that US President Donald Trump’s diversion of military funds to build the wall is unlawful. A grey area in the...

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Filed Challenging the Judgment of Madras High Court in Ganesan v. State Represented by Its Inspector of Police

An appeal was filed before the Supreme court, challenging the judgment & order of Madras High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the HC judgment...

Bombay High Court Refuses Interim Relief to Doctors Alleging Arbitrary Placement at Government Hospitals for One-Year Mandatory Public Service

The Bombay High Court was hearing a plea against the arbitrary placement of doctors for a mandatory period of one year. The petitioners prayed...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -