Non-Compliance With Rule 14 Of NDPS Rules 2022 Regarding Quantitative Test Vitiates Prosecution Case And Renders Detention Illegal: Allahabad High Court Supreme Court Directs Systematic Audit And Institutional Accountability For Safety In Public Spaces Under Article 21 Extra-Judicial Confession Made Before Police Cannot Solely Sustain Preventive Detention: Supreme Court Pre-Trial Incarceration Cannot Masquerade As Punitive Detention When Trial Is Not Imminent: Supreme Court Land Acquisition | Radial ‘Hub-And-Spoke’ Valuation Models For Contiguous Lands Are Legally Unsustainable: Supreme Court Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Deposit Is A Valid Consequence Upon Failure To Pay Balance Sale Consideration Under IBC Liquidation Process: Supreme Court Res Judicata | Suit For Specific Performance Barred If Relief Was Available In Prior Suit For Permanent Injunction And Not Claimed: Supreme Court RERA | Allottee’s Right To Seek Refund Is Absolute And Unqualified, Not Subject To Promoter’s Completion Of Project: Bombay High Court Order 1 Rule 10(2) CPC | Appellate Court Cannot Summarily Reject Addition Of Legal Heirs Based On Unproven Documents Without Reason: Calcutta High Court Order XIV Rule 5 CPC | Trial Court Must Frame Additional Issues Based On Liberty Granted By Supreme Court To Ensure Just Adjudication: Delhi High Court Mere Citation Of Wrong Provision Does Not Invalidate Order If Court Possessed Jurisdiction: Gujarat High Court Injunction Under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC Cannot Be Granted Over Large Unidentified Tract Of Land Without Establishing Prima Facie Case: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 125 CrPC | Mere Rejection Of Permanent Alimony Plea In Divorce Proceedings Does Not Bar Claim For Maintenance: Karnataka High Court Section 311 BNSS | Trial Court Has Discretion To Record Evidence In Narrative Form; Accused Cannot Insist On Question-Answer Format: Kerala High Court Section 482 CrPC | Principle Of Parity Cannot Be Invoked To Quash FIR If Allegations Against Accused Are Distinct And Substantiated: Madhya Pradesh High Court Motor Vehicles Act | Tribunal Cannot Grant 'Right Of Recovery' To Insurer Without Evidence Of Policy Violation: Orissa High Court Mere Inadequacy Of Consideration Or Illiteracy Does Not Vitiate Specific Performance Unless Exploitation Is Proved: Madras High Court Contempt Jurisdiction Cannot Be Converted Into Parallel Forum To Enforce Civil Decrees: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 18 Rule 17 CPC | Reopening Evidence At The Stage Of Arguments Without Compelling Grounds Amounts To Abuse Of Process: Telangana High Court Cannot Circumvent Bail Granted By Supreme Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes PITNDPS Preventive Detention Order

Pre-Planned Manner with a Pre-Determined Mind": Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Witchcraft-Related Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgement, the Supreme Court has upheld the life sentence for the two remaining accused, Bhaktu Gorain (A-1) and Bandhu Gorain (A-3), in the infamous witchcraft-related murder case that originated from West Bengal. The court dismissed the appeal arguing against "common intention" to commit the crime, affirming the judgement of the High Court.

Justice Pankaj Mithal observed, "The very fact that they had assembled in the morning and surrounded (gheraoed) the deceased with deadly weapons is sufficient indication to infer that they had surrounded (gheraoed) in a pre-planned manner with a pre-determined mind."

Background

The case dates back to 1993, when a group of five accused had been convicted of murdering Smt. Keshari Mahato after accusing her of witchcraft. The High Court had earlier confirmed the life sentences for all the accused. However, appeals for three were dismissed in 2011, leaving Bhaktu Gorain and Bandhu Gorain as the remaining appellants in the case.

Witnesses and Evidence

The judgement emphasized that eye witnesses, including the family members of the deceased, were credible and consistent in their testimony. The court noted, "It may be pertinent to mention here that all the aforesaid witnesses successfully stood the test of cross-examination and nothing could be extracted from them in cross-examination that could discredit their testimony."

Medical Report

Further substantiating the case, the post-mortem report indicated that the injuries sustained by the deceased were consistent with the weapons described by the witnesses. Dr. A.K. Hazari, who conducted the post-mortem, was quoted in the judgement, describing the injuries as severe enough to cause immediate death.

Rejected Argument

The defense’s submission arguing that there was no common intention to commit the murder was flatly rejected by the court. "The submission is devoid of any merit as admittedly an altercation had taken place between the parties on the previous night in which all the five accused persons were present, and it is in furtherance of the said quarrel that all of them had appeared in the morning with reinforced vengeance," stated Justice Mithal.

Date of Decision: SEPTEMBER 12, 2023

BHAKTU GORAIN & ANR.  vs THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL    

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/12-Sep-2023_Bhaktu_Vs_State_WB.pdf"]

Latest Legal News