9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Conviction and sentencing of the appellants. 2. Allegations of conspiracy to murder. 3. Evidence and confession admissibility. 4. Applicability of the Juvenile Justice Act. 5. Role and involvement of each appellant. 6. Procedural issues regarding the case diary. Detailed Analysis: 1. Conviction and Sentencing of the Appellants: All three appellants were found guilty by the Sessions Court for various offences. Arnit Das was convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 302 read with Section 120B IPC and sentenced to death, which was later commuted to life imprisonment by the High Court. Sidharth was convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 120B IPC, and Rohan Prakash under Section 302 read with Section 120B IPC, both sentenced to life imprisonment. The High Court confirmed their convictions. 2. Allegations of Conspiracy to Murder: The prosecution alleged that the appellants conspired to murder Abhishek due to a love triangle involving Pallavi. Sidharth and Rohan Prakash orchestrated the plan, and Arnit Das executed it by shooting Abhishek. 3. Evidence and Confession Admissibility: The main evidence included the judicial confession by Arnit Das and his extra-judicial confession to PW-8 Arko Pratim Banerjee. The Sessions Court relied on these confessions, which were corroborated by other evidence, including the testimony of PW-5 and PW-6, who witnessed relevant events. 4. Applicability of the Juvenile Justice Act: Arnit Das claimed he was below 16 years at the time of the crime, seeking protection under the Juvenile Justice Act, 1986. However, the Juvenile Court, Sessions Judge, and High Court determined he was above 16 years. The Supreme Court upheld this finding, stating it was based on substantial evidence. The appellant's plea under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000, was also dismissed as he was not a juvenile under the Act. 5. Role and Involvement of Each Appellant: - Arnit Das: His confession detailed the conspiracy and execution of the murder, corroborated by other evidence. The Supreme Court found his confession voluntary and admissible, affirming his conviction and sentence. - Sidharth: Independent evidence, including testimonies of PW-6 and PW-18, established his presence and active participation in the conspiracy. The confession by Arnit Das further corroborated his involvement. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction. - Rohan Prakash: Although his conduct was suspicious, there was insufficient independent evidence to convict him. The Supreme Court granted him the benefit of doubt and allowed his appeal, setting him at liberty. 6. Procedural Issues Regarding the Case Diary: The Supreme Court noted that the entire case diary was made available to the accused, which could prejudice the investigation and the safety of witnesses. The Court emphasized the need for confidentiality in criminal investigations and criticized the Sessions Judge for allowing extensive cross-examination based on the case diary. Conclusion: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals of Arnit Das and Sidharth, affirming their convictions and sentences. However, it allowed the appeal of Rohan Prakash, acquitting him due to insufficient evidence. The Court also highlighted procedural lapses concerning the handling of the case diary.
|
