Cal HC upholds life term in 2012 Kalyani Expressway murder

Kolkata: The Calcutta High Court has upheld the life sentence of a man convicted of murdering a woman whose body was recovered from a water body near the Kalyani Expressway in North 24-Parganas in December 2012, holding that he exercised “pervasive and all-encompassing control” over her life and failed to explain the circumstances

of her death.

Dismissing the criminal appeal, a Division Bench of Justices Rajasekhar Mantha and Ajay Kumar Gupta observed that the prosecution had established a complete chain of circumstantial evidence, including motive, last-seen circumstances, medical findings and the conduct of the accused, all pointing only to his guilt.

The victim’s body was found on December 7, 2012, in a ditch behind a school for the visually challenged. Post-mortem examination revealed multiple injuries and confirmed death due to strangulation, ruling out accidental drowning.

The court traced the relationship between the accused and the victim, noting that he was initially engaged as a caretaker at her residence and later occupied part of the house while running a business. He persuaded the victim to allow demolition of her house on the promise of redevelopment, assuring her of a flat and money. Evidence showed these assurances were never fulfilled, leaving the victim and her son financially distressed and dependent on him.

Witnesses testified that the accused controlled the victim’s movements and finances, including possession of her bank instruments, and arranged rented accommodation for her and her son. The court noted that the victim repeatedly demanded fulfilment of the promises, leading to disputes.

A handwritten declaration made by the victim before her death, expressing apprehension that the accused would kill her, was held admissible as it related to the circumstances leading to her death and corroborated other evidence.

Relying on the “last seen” theory, the court noted that the victim was last seen alive in the company of the accused shortly before her disappearance. As she was under his exclusive control, the burden lay on him to explain what happened to her, which he failed to do. Misleading statements on her whereabouts and his conduct after her disappearance were treated as additional incriminating circumstances.

Holding that the chain of evidence was complete and consistent, the High Court dismissed the appeal and directed that the accused be taken into custody to serve the remainder of his life sentence.