NAZRUL MONDAL AND ORS. versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL

Citation: [1997] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 697 · Decided: 23-10-1997 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: G.T. NANAVATI · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

NAZRUL MONDAL AND ORS. 
A 
v. 
STATE OF WEST BENGAL 
OCTOBER 23, 1997 
[G.T. NANAVATI AND V.N. KHARE, JJ.] 
B 
Indian Penal Code, 1860 : S. 302 read with S. 149 : Murder by 
members of unlawful assembly-All eye witnesses related to the deceased-
Their evidence-Admissibility of-Held : Courts below were right in placing C 
reliance on their evidence-Further, where accused are named in FIR as 
accomplices, it is not essential to ascribe specific allegation to them. 
The appellants were alleged to be part of a group of persons which had 
assaulted and killed the deceased. The incident was said to have been witnessed 
by PW-1, brother of the deceased, PW-4, his daughter, PW-5, his son, PW- D 
3 and PW-6. It was contended before the trial Court that these witnesses were 
all related to the deceased, that the presence of PW-4 and PW-5 with the 
deceased at that time was doubtful, that PW-1 had admitted in cross-
examination that when he went to the place of incident his brother had already 
fallen dead, and that PW-3 was a chance witness. The trial court, however, 
relying on the evidence of these witnesses convicted six accused, including E 
the three appellants for the said offences. The High Court agreed with the 
appreciation of evidence by the trial court and confirmed conviction. 
This Court granted special leave to the appellants only on the basis that 
their names did not appear in the F.l.R. _At the bar, the appellants contended 
that no specific allegation was made against them, that the evidence of PW-4 F 
and PW-5 ought not to have been accepted as no blood stains were noticed on 
their clothes since the injuries caused to the deceased had led to spurting of 
blood, more so as the sound of footsteps of 20 accused would have attracted 
their attention, that evidence of PW-3 should not have been accepted because 
he had stated in his evidence that he had on that day gone for bath in a doba, G 
and that the incident having taken place almost in the village itself, a number 
of independent persons would have witnessed the incident. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD : 1. There is no flaw in the appreciation c;.f evidence of eye- H 
697 
698 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] SUPP. 4 S.C.R. 
A witnesses by the courts below. The Trial Court believed the presence of PW-
1 as his house was only 100 feet away from the place of incident. It found that 
PW-Sand PW-4 were accompan}ing their father as he was going to the market 
for purchasing cloth for them. It also believed the presence of PW-3 as his 
evidence stood corroborated by PW-8, who on being informed by the former 
B soon after the incident, had in turn telephoned the police station. If also found 
corroboration of evidence of eye-witnesses in the find of case property from 
the place of incident and also by the medical evidence. The High Court had 
rightly agreed with these findings. (700-B-C) 
2. The names of the appellants are mentioned as accused ii) the FIR at 
C Sr. Nos. 4, S and 6. That report contains an allegation that the df:eased was 
attacked by all the accused named therein. That would mean that there was 
an allegation against the appellants that they had assaulted the deceased and 
had thus taken part in killing the deceased. (700-G) 
[ 
D 
3. The evidence on record clearly discloses that PW-4 and PW-S were 
walking ahead of the deceased by four or five steps. It is likely th3t they were 
at little distance from the deceased. Their attention, as stated by them, was 
drawn only when they had heard the cry raised by their father. The deceased 
was assaulted after he was surrounded by the accused. Therefore, there was 
no possibility of their being so near and their clothes becoming blood-stained. 
E Further, it has not been brought out in the cross-examination of these 
witnesses as to how and in what manner the accused had reached that place. 
It is possible that the accused had approached the deceased quietly. It cannot, 
therefore, be speculated that the footsteps of20 accused would have created 
sufficient noise to attract attention of these witnesses. (700-H; 701-A•C) 
F 
G 
4. PW-3 has stated in his cross-examination that when this incident 
had taken place besides him only PW-4 and PW-S were there and others came 
after he had raised cries. It was not established therefore that over and above 
the said eye-witnesses others had seen the incident. (701-F-E) 
S. In his evidence the investigating officer clearly stated that there was 
a tank near 

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