LexJNANENDRA NATH GHOSE versus THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
Moy 8, 126 SUPREME COUR.T REPORTS [1960(1)] JNANENDRA NATH GHOSE v. THE STATE OF \VEST BENGAL (SYED JAFER IMAM AND J. L. KAPUR, JJ.) j u.ry Trial-M isdirecti01i-A pprover-Reliability--C orrobora- tjon-1 ndian Evidence Act, I872 (I of I872) s. I33· The appellant was tried on a charge of murder by the Sessions Judge with the aid of a jury. The evidence against him consisted of the testimony of an approver and the proof of corroborative circumstances tending to connect him with the crime. The jury found the appellant guilty and the Sessions Judge accepting the verdict sentenced him to imprisonment for life. An appeal to the High Court was dismissed as that Court found no misdirections in the charge to the jury. The appellant contended that there was misdirection in the charge to the jury in that the jury was not told, as laid down in Sarwan Singh v. The State of Punjab, [1957] S.C.R. 953, that the approver's evidence had to satisfy a double test i.e., he must be a reliable witness and his evidence must receive sufficient corroboration and in that the corroborating evidence was not sufficient to connect the appellant with the crime. Held, that there were no misdirections in the charge. The observations in Sarwan Singh's case that it must be shown that the approver was a reliable witness were made in the special circumstances of that case where the approver had definitely been found to be so thoroughly discrepant as to be wholly unreliable. In the present case there was nothing to show that the evidence of the approver was in any way unreliable. Sarwatt Singh v. The State of Pmijab, [1957] S.C.R. 953, dis- tinguished. The Sessions Judge had correctly directed the jury that the corroboration of the evidence of the approver in material parti- culars must relate not only to the commission of the crime, but also to the evidence connecting or tending to connect the accused with the crin1e. The circumstances proved in the case corroborated the approver's evidence connecting the appellant with the crime. Once there was evidence of such circumstances it was for the jury to decide whether they were sufficient corroboration of the approver's evidence that the appellant murdered the deceased. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 101 of 1958. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and Order dated the 12th September, 1956 of the Calcutta. High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 19 of 1956, a.rising S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 127 out of the judgment and order dated the 8th Decem- ber, 1955 of the Sessions Judge, Birbhum in Sessions Trial No. l of November 1955. H.J. Umrigar and D. N. Mukherjee,. for the appel- lant. K. B. Bagchi, P. K. Ghosh for P. K. Bose, for the respondent. 1959. May 8. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by IMAM J.-The appellant was sentenced to imprison- ment for life under s. 302 by the Sessions Judge of Birbhum who agreed with the majority verdict of the jury that he was guilty. He appealed against his con- viction to the Calcutta High Court. That Court being of the opinion that there was no misdirection in the Sessions Judge's charge to the jury dismissed the appeal. Two persons Jagdish Gorain and Sudhir Gorain were also tried along with the appellant but. were acquitted by the jury whose verdict the Sessions Judge accepted. The appellant appealed to the High Court for a certificate to appeal to this Court which was refused. The present appeal is by special leave. According to the prosecution Sibapada Hati was married to a girl by the name of Lila. About a month previous to the date of occurrence the appellant had made a proposal' to her that she should live with him which was rejected. The appellant •thought that the removal of Sibapada Hati would clear the way and improve his chance of gaining Lila's favour. Accord- ingly he murdered Sibapada Hati on the May 26, 1955. In that murder he was assisted by Jagdish Gorain, Sudhir Gorain and the approver Sastipada Ghose. The conviction of the appellant depended on the evidence of the approver and the circumstantial evidence which corroborated him in connecting or tending or connect the appellant with the murder of the deceased Sibapada Hati. Unless there was a mis- direction or non-direction amounting to a misdirection in the charge to the jury which, in fact, had occasioned a failure of justice the jury's verdict must prevail and :r959 J nanendra N atJ. Ghose
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.