Yad Ali Sk. @ Yad Ali vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 4710 Cal

25.07. 2022 item No.20 n.b.

ct. no. 34 CRR 3952 of 2009

Yad Ali Sk. @ Yad Ali Vs.

The State of West Bengal & Ors.

Mr. Arijit Ganguly Ms. Sujata Das .....For the State

The present revisional application was preferred

challenging the judgment and order dated 27.07.2009 passed

by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1 st Fast Track

Court, Lalbagh, Murshidabad in Sessions Serial No.37 of 2005

(Sessions Trial No.1 of September, 2008).

The contention of the case relates to Ranitala Police

Station Case No.36 of 2005 dated 30.04.2004 of the Indian

Penal Code.

The learned Trial Court while delivering its judgment

categorically observed that during the trial of the case the

enclosed report was marked as Exhibit - VI which was

preliminary enquiry conducted by the police authorities on

29.04.2004 at about 8/9 a.m.

According to the Trial Court no sufficient evidence

appeared as to the place where the dead body of the victim

namely, Abdus Sattar was found and the injuries referred to or

complained is not available in the enquiry report or evidence

placed before the Trial Court. Additionally, the Learned Trial

Court was pleased to observe that there was a suspicion on the

basis of which the accused persons have been implicated in

the present case and there are no cogent materials available in

evidence which would bring the case within the ambit of proof

beyond reasonable doubt.

An accused is presumed to be innocent and acquittal

by a Trial Court fortifies such fact, as such, when the issue of

acquittal is subject matter of challenge, the higher court has to

be much more cautious regarding the issue of interference with

an order of acquittal. It is also settled proposition of law that if

two views are possible; one in favour of the accused and the

other against the accused, in that case until and unless there

is manifest error pointed out from the records of the case

higher Court is precluded from interfering with the order of

acquittal. That being the scenario and total period of 18 years

having passed since the date of the incident, I am of the

opinion that no interference is called for in respect of order of

acquittal passed by the Learned Trial Court.

Accordingly, CRR 3952 of 2009 is dismissed.

Connected applications, if any, are consequently

disposed of.

Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order

duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

( Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)