Kolkata: Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of three men in a 1996 murder case, holding that serious investigative lapses, unexplained delays, and procedural irregularities had vitiated the trial.
A Division Bench of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta found that the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond a reasonable doubt. According to the prosecution, Sujauddin and another man had gone to a house to eat papaya on March 13, 1996, when the accused allegedly entered and attacked them with sticks and sharp agricultural implements.
Sujauddin later died in a Kolkata hospital, while the other injured witness survived.
The court identified multiple loopholes in the prosecution’s case. The FIR, though registered on the date of the incident, was forwarded to the Magistrate nearly 12 days later, with no explanation from the investigating officer. The Bench observed that such a delay casts doubt on the authenticity and timing of the FIR.
The court also noted a nearly six-month delay in examining key witnesses, including the injured eyewitness, whose statement was recorded seven months after the incident. No statement of the deceased was recorded, despite material indicating that he was conscious for a substantial period before his death. Nor was his statement recorded before a Magistrate.
Medical evidence did not conclusively link the injuries to the alleged weapons. The injury report did not mention the victim’s name and omitted the history of how the injuries were sustained. The alleged weapons were not recovered.
The court further found fault with the manner in which charges were framed. Although the victim had died in 1996, the trial court initially framed charges in 2004 without including murder. The charge of murder was added 13 years later. The High Court held that such a belated framing of charges had prejudiced the accused.
It also noted inconsistencies regarding the place of occurrence and the non-examination of several material witnesses, including villagers who had taken the injured to the hospital.
Observing that a trial continuing over 22 years and culminating in a conviction could itself amount to a miscarriage of justice, the Bench set aside the conviction and ordered the release of the surviving appellants, subject to statutory conditions. One appellant had died during the pendency of proceedings, while another was found to be a juvenile and his bail bond was discharged.