Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: PANSKURA in State Of West Bengal vs Md. Raees Qureshi @ Hadi Qureshi on 13 September, 2022Matching Fragments
Arguments at the Bar:-
Mr. Mukherjee, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Biswas argued there is no legally admissible evidence connecting the appellant to the murder. The case is purely based on surmises and conjectures. Circumstances relied upon by the prosecution have not been proved beyond doubt. Neither do they unerringly point to the guilt of the appellant. Missing diary lodged by P.W. 1, Md. Firoz Qureshi was not exhibited and there is unexplained delay in lodging first information report. There is inordinate delay in examining witnesses particularly P.W. 2, Md. Ishtiyaque Khan who claims to have seen the appellant boarding a train at Tikiapara Railway Station proceeding towards Panskura with four children. No explanation was offered for such delayed examination. Version of P.Ws. 6, and 10 who claim to have seen the appellant with the minor victims near Kukur Bhukha Bridge suffer from various contradictions and embellishments. Extra-judicial confession of the appellant has not been proved. P.W. 3, Md. Mujahid Qureshi did not state in Court that appellant stated he had murdered the children. Version of other witnesses on this issue are hearsay and inadmissible in law. Mobile phone of P.W. 3 was not seized and no effort was made to ascertain the subscriber details of mobile No. 8100505825. Motive of crime has not been proved. P.W. 18, Md. Sahil Qureshi father-in-law of the appellant stated for the first time in Court that the appellant used to suspect the paternity of his children. Wife of appellant was not examined to prove such fact. On the other hand, deposition of P.Ws. 3 and 7 show relationship between the couple was good. Parents of one of the victims Shahid Hossain have not been examined. Time of death of the victims has not been ascertained. No external injuries or poison was found during post-mortem or FSL examination of the victims. Arrest of the appellant is shrouded in mystery. Though P.W. 25, S.I. Rabiul Haque claimed appellant was arrested from Bagnan Hospital on 07.12.2011, P.W. 30 attending doctor stated the appellant had been brought to the hospital by police on 05.12.2011. Prosecution case has not established beyond reasonable doubt and the appellant is entitled to an order of acquittal.
On the other hand, Mr. Mukherjee with Mr. Mitra for the State submitted that the circumstances proved in the case unerringly point to the guilt of the appellant. Elaborating the issue he submitted the appellant was last seen with the four minor victims prior to the incident. P.Ws. 1, 7 and 18 saw the appellant taking away the minor children from the marriage ceremony at Al-Hayat. P.Ws. 6 and 10 saw them at Kukur Bhakha Bridge. P.W. 2 saw the appellant board a train proceeding towards Panskura from Tikiapara Railway Station with the children. On the next day, that is, 15.11.2012 at 10:30 a.m. dead bodies of two female children were recovered and body of one male child was recovered in the evening of the same day. On the next day dead body of another male child was recovered in the morning. Post-mortem doctor, Dr. Tapan Kumar Roy Chowdhury (P.W. 24) opined that the victims died due to ante mortem drowning. Victims were minor children aged between 4-10 years. Referring to medical treaties, learned Counsel argued homicidal drowning of infants and children is not uncommon. He further adverted to other incriminating circumstances, namely, abscondence of the appellant after the occurrence and his evasive answers with regard to the cause of death during examination under section 313 Cr.P.C. He also submitted motive to commit the crime has been proved. Appellant had acted in a cruel and inhuman manner and killed four minor and helpless children. Hence, the appeal be dismissed and the death sentence be confirmed. Evidence on record: An analysis:-
Prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence. A tabular chart of the prosecution witnesses and the circumstances transpiring from their deposition are set out hereinbelow:-
Witness Nos. and Names Description of Particulars
P.W. 1: Firoz Qureshi (Complainant) Brother in Law of Accused
Attended ceremony at Al-Hayat
Lodged F.I.R.
Identified the bodies of 4 dead
children at P.S.
Heard about the phone call by
accused to Mujahid from his
Sister. Accused had admitted to
have killed the children.
P.W. 2: Md. Ishtiyaque Khan Saw the accused with 4
(Driver of Oil Tanker at Hindustan Children standing on the UP
Petroleum Company, Haldia) Platform at Tikiapara Station
boarding the train towards
Panskura
Went to Bagnan PS along with
P.Ws. 1, 6 and 10 to identify the
dead bodies
Heard about the phone call of
Accused to his brother Mujahid
P.W. 3: Md. Mujahid Qureshi The Relationship of the couple
(Brother of Accused) was good
(Hearsay Witness) Received a Phone call from
accused on 16.11.11 and
thereafter, on the next two days
Did not the record the phone
call
His phone was not seized
P.W. 4: Md. Sabi Qureshi (Brother Went to the Police Station to
of Accused) collect the dead bodies
P.W. 5: Md. Jahid Qureshi (Brother Accused made Phone call to
of Accused) Mujahid
(Declared Hostile) Mental Disturbance of accused
started 2 years prior to the
incident
He rescued the accused once
from Asansol and once from
Pilkhana
P.W. 6: Md. Khurshid Alam Saw Accused and 4 children
(Villager) proceeding towards Tikiapara
Station
P.W. 7: Md. Murtaja (Villager) Marriage Attendee
Identified the dead bodies
Mujahid told that accused called
and he killed the 4 children as
he had some problems with
them
Not interrogated by Police
P.W. 8: Kamal Hajari (Villager) Witness to recovery of 2 Female
Dead Bodies on 15.11.11
P.W. 9: Yusuf Mallick (Villager) Witness to Recovery of 2 Female
Dead Bodies on 15.11.11
P.W. 10: Md. Sukur (Villager) Saw accused & 4 Children going
towards Tikiapara Station
At Uluberia Hospital accused
gave a phone call to his brother
and asked whether the bodies
have been interred
P.W. 11: Md. Arif (Advocate) Scribe of F.I.R.
P.W. 12: Sk. Anwar Ali (Villager) Witness to recovery of 2 female
dead bodies on 15.11.11
P.W. 13: Sk. Almasin (Villager) Witness to recovery of 2 female
dead bodies on 15.11.11
P.W. 14: Sk. Faridul (Villager) Witness to recovery of 2 female
dead bodies on 15.11.11 in
Morning
P.W. 15: Uttam Dalapati (Villager) Witness to recovery of a male
dead body on 16.11.11 at 10:00
a.m. [Shahid Hossain]
P.W. 16: Sudipta Dey (Supervisor at Witness to recovery of 2 female
Tantia Construction Ltd.) dead bodies on 15.11.11) at 10-
10:30 a.m.
P.W. 17: Rajesh Chauhan (Railway Witness to recovery of 2 female
Contractor at Tantia Construction) dead bodies at 10:30-11:00 a.m.
P.W. 18: Md. Sahil Qureshi (Father Attendee at Marriage
in Law of the accused) Accused told him he was going
to Kukur Bhukha Bridge for a
walk along with 4 children
Came to know about the
confession of accused to P.W. 3
from P.W. 1
The accused created trouble
with his wife and suspected she
had illicit relation with elder
son-in-law of P.W. 18 and
paternity of the children
Accused suffered from mental
illness and was getting treated
at Kacchar Sarif Darga for 40
days
Identified the dead bodies at the
Police Station
P.W. 19: Nazimuddin Mallick Witness to recovery of dead body
(Student) of children
P.W. 20: Tapan Kumar Naga (ASI, On 15.11.11 held inquest over
Police Officer,Bagnan P.S.) the dead bodies of Alisa and
Raunak Khatun. At 18:00 hrs
on the same day, he conducted
inquest over dead body of
Abdul Qadir
On 16.11.11 at 10:30 a.m.
conducted inquest over dead
body of Shahid Hossain
P.W. 21: Ajoy Kumar Mondal (Police On 16.11.11, he accompanied 4
Constable, Bagnan P.S.) dead bodies for PM to Uluberia
Hospital
P.W. 22: Basanta Sharma ( Judicial Recorded the statement of P.W.
Officer) 2 on 13.03.2012
P.W. 23: SK Pintu (Carpenter) Witness to recovery of a dead
body of a male child on
16.11.2011
P.W. 24: Dr. Tapan Kumar Roy Conducted Post Mortem on
Chowdhury (PM Doctor, Uluberia 16.11.11
Hospital) Stated that death of all the four
children was due to drowning,
ante mortem in nature
No Marks of external injuries
Water and mud found inside
stomach of all dead bodies
P.W. 25: Rabiul Haque (SI, Police Took charge of the investigation
Officer, Howrah P.S.) from 21.11.11
Refers to UD cases registered in
connection with the recovery of
dead bodies of 4 children
As per the reports collected by
the nodal officer the accused
fled to Uttar Pradesh after
committing the crime
Went to Pratapgarh on 23.11.11
to arrest the accused but
retuned empty handed on
27.11.11
Received information that
accused consumed Phenyl at
relative's House at Bagnan
On 07.12.11 the accused was
arrested and his phone was
seized
Accused made Telephone call to
his Brother in mobile No.
8100505825 on 16th, 17th, 24th,
28th and 29th November, 2011
from his number.
Did not examine the wife of
accused as she was sick
P.W. 10 did not state that he
had seen accused go towards
Tikiapara Station
P.W. 18 did not state the issue
of paternity before him.
However, he stated that accused
suffered from mental illness and
was getting treated at Kacchar
Sarif Darga for 40 days
P.W. 26: Arijit Das (Nodal Officer) Bagnan P.S. asked for call
records of accused from
15.11.11 to 17.11.11
Accused is the owner of No.
9748643708
There were simultaneous to and
fro calls from the accused phone
to 8100505825 (Ext. 18A)
The name of the owner of phone
No. 8100505825 was not
ascertained as it was not sought
for in requisition
P.W. 27: Amarnath Purkait (Senior Examined the viscera of the four
Scientific Officer) dead bodies and no poison was
detected in the viscera of the
deceased
P.W. 28: Bhudeb Adhikary Witness to seizure of mobile
(Constable, Bagnan P.S.) phone of accused and discharge
certificate by P.W. 25
P.W. 29: Sk Jahed Ali (A.S.I., Police Was posted at Baganan P.S. as
Officer, Bagnan P.S.) A.S.I.
P.W. 20 (Tapan Kumar Naga,
A.S.I. Police) handed over the
mobile phone of accused and
discharge certificate to P.W. 25
P.W. 30: Piyali Banerjee (Medical On 05.12.11 accused was
Officer, Bagnan Rural Hospital) brought to the hospital from
police custody for phenyl
poisoning
The patient was discharged on
07.12.11 and, thereafter,
arrested on the same day
P.W. 31: Md. Shahid (Owner of Al- Gave the house to Murtaja
Hayat) Qureshi for a function
P.W. 32: Hemanta Dey (A.S.I., Was posted as ASI, Bagnan P.S.
Police Officer, Bagnan P.S.) Drew the Formal F.I.R. after
receiving the Written Complaint
on 11.01.2012
P.W. 33: Shyamal Dutta (Police Received the charge of
Officer, S.I., Bagnan P.S.) investigation on 11.01.2012
Did not investigate the reasons
for delay in lodging the F.I.R.
Could not get any person from
either at Barbhagabatipur or
Rabibhag village who said they
saw the deceased children with
the accused before the incident
P.W. 34: Debashis Banerjee (Police Took Charge of the case on
Officer, C.I.D., D.D.I., Howrah ) 25.02.12 from Bagnan P.S.
P.W. 1 Fully corroborated his
version
On 26.02.12 examined P.W. 2
The wife of accused was in
traumatic condition and hence
was not examined
Submitted the charge-sheet
Law on circumstantial evidence:-
Whether there is a live link between the 'last seen' theory and the homicidal death of a victim must be determined on the facts and circumstances of each case. Tender age and vulnerability of the victim, relationship of the victim and the accused in whose custody he/she is last seen and the nature of control the custodian i.e. the guardian exercises over the ward are relevant considerations to test the existence of live link between the last seen theory and the death of the victim. When it is established that minor children of tender age are in the exclusive control of parents/relations and owing to his/her immature age would not be in a position to exercise free will or movement without his supervision, it becomes incumbent on the said guardian to explain the circumstances in which the child had gone out of his custody. A natural guardian having custody of his minor child has overwhelming control over the movements of the latter. This situation creates a graver circumstance than one where two adults are last seen in the company of one another. It becomes further acute when it is proved the minor suffered homicidal death after he/she was last in the custody of his/her natural guardian. The present case shows the appellant was the father of three of the four children aged between 4-10 years who were in his exclusive custody since the evening of 14.11.2011. By the next morning their dead bodies were recovered under circumstances which irresistibly indicate a case of homicidal drowning. It is strenuously argued the live link has snapped as no one was examined who saw the appellant with the four children on the bank of the river Damodar either at Barbhagabatipur or Rabibagh. Appellant relied on Shailendra Rajdev Pasvan and Another vs. The State of Gujarat and Others4 in support of his submission. From the evidence on record it appears that appellant with the four children had boarded a train (2020) 14 SCC 750 proceeding towards Panskura from Tikiapara Railway Station around 5/5:30 p.m. on 14.11.2011. Admittedly, the train proceeding towards Panskura goes through Bagnan which proves that the appellant had reached the bank of river Damodar by using such transport. By the time appellant reached the bank of river Damodar it was late evening. Nothing is placed on record to show that the river bank was a populated one. Appellant had taken the children to a deserted river bank to drown them. He chose a deserted place to commit the crime. Hence, it is all but natural no witness could be found who saw the appellant with the children at the river bank. Thus, the live link between the appellant being last seen with the victims boarding the train towards Panskura and the recovery of their dead bodies from river Damodar on and from the next day is established beyond doubt.