Sanjib Gupta vs State Of West Bengal & Ors

We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant/applicant in CRAN 154 of 2018 seeking an order of suspension of sentence and for grant of bail pending the appeal CRA 267 of 2017 filed against the applicant's conviction and sentence handed down under Section 302 of the IPC.

We have heard the learned counsel for the State Government.

The allegation is that the accused / appellant killed his wife. The autopsy report corroborated by the doctor, PW-13, showed that the victim died of homicidal death as a result of a stabbed injury on her left chest. The Court below noted that except the doctor and the investigating officer, no witnesses supported the prosecution case.

The first information statement is shown to have been offered by PW-4, the mother of the victim. She stated in Court that she had actually signed a blank paper which has been converted into a written complaint and she cannot tell the name of the person, who lodged the written complaint. She was declared hostile to the prosecution. PW-1 is the father of the deceased, PW-2 is the elder brother of the deceased and PW-3 is another brother of the deceased. All of them turned hostile and did not state about the identity of assailant and they did not attribute the killing of the victim to the accused. So is the version of PW-5, the wife of the elder brother of the deceased. PW-9 is the son and PW-16 is the daughter of the victim. It is shown that statements were recorded from them apparently under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. Those witnesses, however, denied such statements and turned out to be hostile.

The utility of a statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., that too even without examining the learned Magistrate before whom such statement was recorded, is not of such value which could be used along with the testimony of the investigating officer and the doctor who conducted the post mortem without any other legal evidence on record to sustain the conviction. This is a prima facie view that we gather on the basis of the materials on record and the assimilation of the evidence by the Court below and the resultant order of conviction and sentence.

We are, therefore, of the view that the appellant/applicant has demonstrated a strong prima facie case as to possibility of success of his appeal to this Court. There are no other circumstances which can be gathered against the interest of the appellant/applicant being granted an order of suspension of sentence/bail.

Accordingly, the sentence imposed on the appellant, the applicant herein, is suspended and it is ordered that the applicant/appellant, viz, Sanjib Gupta be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of Rs.5000/- each, one of whom must be local to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Malda on further condition that he shall be present or represented as and when the appeal is taken up for hearing.

CRAN 154 of 2018 is thus disposed of.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties on priority basis after completion of all requisite formalities.