ANANTLAL GHOSH versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Citation: [2005] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 113 · Decided: 07-09-2005 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: H.K. SEMA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

ANANTLAL GHOSH 
A 
v. 
STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
SEPTEMBER 7, 2005 
[H.K. SEMA AND TARUN CHATTERJEE, JJ.] 
B 
Penal Code, 1860-Sections 302 and 201rlw34-Murder-Prosecution 
for-Conviction by Courts below on the basis of Circumstantial evidence and 
evidence of prosecution witnesses-On appeal, held: Conviction justified as C 
circumstances of the case consistently point to the guilt of the accused and 
inconsistent with his innocence-Chain of circumstances are complete. 
Criminal Trial-
Circumstantial Evidence-Appreciation of-Held: Such evidence in order D 
to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of any other hypothesis 
other than guilt of the accused. 
Appellant-acc1Jsed was convicted by Courts below u/s 302/210/34 IPC 
for having caused death of a person. The conviction was based or 
circumstantial evidence and on the basis of evidence of PWs 1, 2 and 3. E 
The circumstances noticed were that the deceased had spent a night with 
the appellant previous to the date of incident, the dead body was hurriedly 
cremated before arrival of police; the injuries on the person of deceased 
were corroborated as mentioned in FIR and as stated by PWl and 
corroborated by PWs 3 and 4 and that the witnesses were threatened to 
leave the place. Hence the present appeal. 
F 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. The circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction 
must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis 
except that of the guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only G 
be consistent with. the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with 
his innocence. (114-G) 
2. The testimony of PWs. 2, 3 and 4 alongwith other incriminating 
113 
H 
114 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2005] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 
A materials relied upon by the prosecution taken cumulatively would 
consistently point to the guilt of the accused and inconsistence with his 
innocence. The prosecution has been able to establish the chain of · 
circumstances beyond all reasonable doubt consistently pointing out to the 
guilt of the accused. [115-H; 116-A) 
B 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 293 
of 2004. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.3.2003 of the Calcutta High 
Court in Crl.A. No. 151 of 1993. 
C 
V. Ramasubramanian for the Appellant. 
Tara Chandra Sharina for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
D 
SEMA, J. The appellant alongwith 7 accused were put to trial under 
Sections 302 IPC and 201 read with 34 IPC. Six accused were acquitted by 
the trial court. The appellant was convicted under Sections 302 IPC and 20 I 
read with 34 IPC and sentenced to R.I. for life under Section 302 IPC. The 
appellant was also convicted under Section 201/34 IPC and sentenced to R.I. 
E for five years and a fine of Rs. 2,000, in default further R.I. for six months'. 
The other accused was also convicted under Section 20 I read with 34 IPC 
and was sentenced to four years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 1,000, in default 
further three months' R.I. It appears that he has already undergone the sentence 
and conviction recorded against him. 
F 
This appeal is filed by the accused Anantalal Ghosh who was convicted 
under Section 302/201134 JPC by special leave. 
Admittedl'y, there is no eye-witness to the occurrence. The conviction 
is based on the circumstantial evidence. Both the trial court and the High 
Court recorded the conviction against the appellant on the basis of the evidence 
G of PW.I, PW.2 and PW.3. It is now established principle of law that the 
circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and 
incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis except that of the guilt of 
the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt 
of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence. 
H 
The High Court on re-appreciation of the evidence found following 
ANANTLAL GHOSH v. STA TE OF WEST BENGAL [SEMA,J.] 
II 5 
circumstances well established against the appellant : 
I. That it was the fact that the deceased Lilabati bore marks of certain 
injuries which has been stated in the evidence of PW.I and mentioned in FIR 
(Ext.I) corroborated by the evidence of PW.3 and PW.4. 
A 
2. That the evidence of Pws .2, 3 and 4 with regard to the fact that they B 
were threatened to leave the place and the body of Lilabati was hurriedly 
taken for cremation. 
3. That the fact that no information was given to the police and the 
police could not se

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.