Absence of Videography Alone Not Sufficient For Bail When Custody is Less Than a Year: Delhi High Court Refuses Bail in Commercial Quantity Heroin Use of Permitted Synthetic Colour in Dal Masur Still Constitutes Adulteration: Punjab & Haryana High Court Uphold Conviction Penalty Must Not Result in Civil Death of Professionals: Delhi High Court Reduces Two-Year Suspension of Insolvency Professional, Citing Disproportionate Punishment Right of Cross-Examination is Statutory, Cannot Be Denied When Documents Are Exhibited Later: Chhattisgarh High Court Allows Re-Cross-Examination Compounding after Adjudication is Impermissible under FEMA: Calcutta High Court Declines Post-Adjudication Compounding Plea Tears of a Child Speak Louder Than Words: Bombay HC Confirms Life Term for Man Who Raped 4-Year-Old Alleged Dowry Death After Forced Remarriage: Allahabad High Court Finds No Evidence of Strangulation or Demand “Even If Executant Has No Title, Registrar Must Register the Document If Formalities Are Met” — Supreme Court  Declares Tamil Nadu's Rule 55A(i) Ultra Vires the Registration Act, 1908 Res Judicata Is Not Optional – It’s Public Policy: Supreme Court Slams SEBI for Passing Second Final Order in Fraud Case Against Vital Communications Ltd A Person Has Died… Insurance Company Cannot Escape Liability Without Proving Policy Violation: Supreme Court Slams High Court for Exonerating Insurer in Fatal Accident Case Calling Someone by Caste Name Is Not Enough – It Must Be Publicly Done to Attract SC/ST Act: Supreme Court Acquits All in Jharkhand Land Dispute Case Broken Promises Don’t Make Rape – Mature Adults in Long-Term Relationships Must Accept Responsibility: Supreme Court Quashes Rape Case Against NRI Man Every Broken Relationship Can’t Be Branded Rape: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Retired Judge Accused of Sexual Exploitation on Promise of Marriage No Evidence, No Motive, Not Even Proof of Murder: Supreme Court Slams Conviction, Acquits Man Accused of Killing Wife After Two Years of Marriage You Can’t Assume Silence Is Consent: Supreme Court Sends Back ₹46 Lakh Insurance Dispute to NCDRC for Fresh Determination “Voyage Must Start and End Before Monsoon Sets In — But What If That’s Practically Impossible?” SC Rules Against Insurance Company in Shipping Dispute No Criminal Case Can Be Built on a Land Deal That’s Three Decades Old Without Specific Allegations: Supreme Court Upholds Quashing of FIR Against Ex-JK Housing Chief Just Giving a Call for Protest Doesn’t Make One Criminally Liable - Rail Roko Protest Quashed Against KCR Ex-CM: Telangana High Court Ends 13-Year-Old Proceedings for 2011 Telangana Agitation This Is Not a Case of Greed Simplicitor but a Celebration of Fraud: Karnataka High Court Grants Specific Performance, Slams Vendor for Violating Court Orders Limitation Period Under Section 18-A of Rent Act Mandatory, Delay Not Condonable – Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds NRI Landlord's Eviction Against Tenant Custom Department Cannot Revive Time-Barred Show Cause Notices After Seven Years Without Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Quashes Customs Notices to JBS Exports Public Property Cannot Be Managed Privately for Decades — Fair Price Shops in Hospitals Must Be Allotted by Auction: Jammu & Kashmir High Court Registered Sale Deed Alone Does Not Dismantle Prior Security Interest: Gauhati High Court Rejects Buyer’s Writ Against SARFAESI Action, Cites Expanded Statutory Definition Old OBC Certificates Won’t Work — Supreme Court Says Cut-Off Date Is Final in Rajasthan Civil Judge Exams

Absence of Explanation by Accused Strengthens Prosecution’s Case: Calcutta High Court on Homicidal Strangulation

17 November 2024 8:43 PM

By: sayum


High Court dismisses appeal in wife’s murder case, affirms conviction under Sections 302 and 201 of IPC.  The Calcutta High Court has dismissed the appeal of Jadav Sarkar, who was convicted for the murder of his wife, Kalpana Sarkar, upholding the trial court’s judgment. The bench, comprising Justices Soumen Sen and Uday Kumar, emphasized the significant role of circumstantial evidence and the absence of a plausible explanation by the accused under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act in affirming the conviction.

Jadav Sarkar was convicted for the murder of his wife, Kalpana Sarkar, whose body was found in a pond near their residence on May 22, 2007. Kalpana’s brother, Susanta Majumdar, filed a complaint alleging that Jadav, who had a history of physically and mentally torturing Kalpana, was responsible for her death. The prosecution argued that Kalpana was strangled by Jadav and her body was disposed of in the pond, while the defense claimed she accidentally drowned. The trial court convicted Jadav under Sections 302 (murder) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The court found the medical evidence conclusive in establishing that Kalpana’s death was due to manual strangulation. “The post-mortem report and expert testimony unequivocally indicated that the cause of death was ante-mortem and homicidal in nature,” noted the bench. The injuries observed, including contusions and subluxation of the hyoid bone, were consistent with manual strangulation rather than accidental drowning.

The court emphasized the importance of circumstantial evidence, applying the principles outlined in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra. “The circumstances must form a complete chain pointing to the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt,” the court reiterated. The prosecution established a motive, the last seen theory, medical evidence indicating homicide, and the accused’s failure to provide a satisfactory explanation.

The court stressed the application of Section 106, which shifts the burden of proof to the accused for facts within his special knowledge. “The accused’s inability to explain the circumstances of his wife’s death, especially within the privacy of their home, significantly bolsters the prosecution’s case,” the judgment stated. The court noted that the appellant’s inconsistent and insufficient explanations under Section 313 Cr.P.C further strengthened the inference of his guilt.

The judgment dissected the legal framework for evaluating circumstantial evidence and the role of the accused’s statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. “The prosecution must prove all links in the chain of circumstances beyond reasonable doubt, and the failure of the accused to provide a credible explanation can be an additional link,” the court explained. The bench cited multiple precedents to reinforce its reasoning, including the principles from Hanumant v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Musheer Khan @ Badshah Khan & Anr. V. State of Madhya Pradesh.

Justice Soumen Sen remarked, “The ligature marks and the nature of injuries corroborated by medical evidence leave no room for the defense’s theory of accidental drowning.” He further noted, “The accused’s failure to explain the presence of his gamcha tied around the victim’s neck and his inconsistent statements are critical incriminatory factors.”

The Calcutta High Court’s dismissal of Jadav Sarkar’s appeal underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding convictions based on robust circumstantial evidence and the stringent application of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act. This judgment reinforces the legal precedent that in cases involving circumstantial evidence, the accused’s silence or inadequate explanation can significantly impact the outcome. The court’s detailed legal reasoning and reliance on established principles ensure that the conviction serves as a strong precedent in similar cases.

Date of Decision: July 02, 2024

Jadav Sarkar vs. State of West Bengal

Similar News