Calcutta High Court sets aside husband’s life sentence in wife’s 2010 ‘murder’

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of a Purulia man who had been serving a life sentence for the death of his wife 15 years ago, after finding that the prosecution’s case collapsed under hostile witnesses, contradictory testimony and missing links in the chain of evidence.

A Bench of Justices Rajasekhar Mantha and Ajay Kumar Gupta allowed the appeal filed by Rupesh Paramanik, who had been found guilty of murdering his wife Sitala Devi by a sessions court in 2016. His parents, co-accused in the same case, had been acquitted at trial.

The case stemmed from the events of June 2010, when Sitala was found dead in her matrimonial home. The autopsy recorded multiple injuries and concluded the cause of death as “asphyxia due to strangulation”. This gave the prosecution an opening to argue that it was a case of homicide within the four walls of the home.

But the High Court found that the investigation and the trial evidence did not establish the appellant’s guilt. Although a scratch was noted on Paramanik’s arm, the doctors had not conducted any test to link it with nail scrapings from the deceased. Without that forensic connection, the medical evidence remained incomplete.

More damaging for the prosecution was the collapse of its witness support. The complainant, who was the victim’s father, admitted during cross-examination that parts of his complaint were false. The scribe of the complaint told the court he had written it incorrectly. Several neighbours also turned hostile, refusing to back the prosecution’s case. One witness, a relative who had slept nearby, stated he had heard no disturbance on the night of the death. “In the absence of proof of the appellant’s presence at the house at the relevant time, and with vital links in the chain of circumstantial evidence missing, conviction cannot be sustained,” the judges said.

Ordering Paramanik’s release, the court directed that he be freed “forthwith if not wanted in any other case,” subject to execution of a bond before the trial court, which will remain valid for six months. The trial court has been asked to complete all formalities on receiving the records.