Man killed in sleep by brothers, HC cancels bail; Accused directed to surrender before trial court

Kolkata: In a 2009 case where a man was killed by two of his elder brothers while he was asleep with his wife and child inside a room, the Calcutta High Court, considering the medical evidence and testimony of prosecution witnesses, refused to interfere with the conviction order and instead cancelled the bail of the two accused, directing them to surrender before the trial court.

The Bench of Justice Tirthankar Ghosh was moved by the appellants (accused brothers) who were convicted under various IPC Sections in 2019 by the trial court.

The wife of the deceased (Sushanta) said, on August 2009 dawn when she was sleeping at her parent’s home with her husband and child, Sibu and Rabi (brothers-in-law) broke into the room. One of them hit her husband with a wooden baton while the other struck repeated blows with a sickle. She too was attacked when she attempted to flee the room.

The mother (complainant) of the wife said she heard a loud scream from the adjacent room. On entering it, saw her son-in-law lying unconscious on the bed in a pool of blood. Her daughter too was drenched in blood and sustained injuries. She said both the accused fled the room. The couple was taken to Naihati State General Hospital where the husband succumbed to his injuries and the wife was released after a week.

The prosecution relied upon 13 witnesses including the wife. The autopsy doctor stated death was due to ante-mortem injuries. He opined if a person is hurt by a wooden cot leg with heavy force, the injuries in the report may be caused.

Appellants’ advocate submitted there were inconsistencies in the statements of prosecution witnesses. Although medical reports indicated lacerated wounds there weren’t any incised wounds. Neither a sickle nor a wooden baton was recovered.

The court observed when a person is attacked while asleep it may not be possible then to vividly describe the nature of the deadly weapons used but the fact remains that the injuries inflicted were sufficient to cause death. The statements of the wife and other prosecution witnesses create a chain of circumstance within which a ring of truth is attached. The prosecution successfully established a case of proof beyond reasonable doubt and “there is no alternate circumstance which can be inferred from the prosecution evidence so relied upon in the instance case”.