Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Dilip Mallick vs. State of West Bengal

The Supreme Court of India, in its judgment dated February 14, 2017, upheld the conviction and life imprisonment sentence of Dilip Mallick in a brutal murder case. The case involved the killing of Sambhu Mallick, whose decapitated body was found in Chandmuni Tea Estate, West Bengal. The appellant challenged the decision of the Calcutta High Court, which had confirmed the conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Background of the Case

On February 3, 2004, a beheaded body was discovered in the Chandmuni Tea Estate near the Himachal Behar Abasan Project. The incident led to a police investigation initiated by a written complaint filed by Bhupendra Nath Singh (PW-12). Based on the investigation, the accused Dilip Mallick, Hira Routh, and Khogesh Bansfore were arrested.

The police recorded statements from the accused on February 4, 2004, which led them to the location where the severed head was buried in a drain. The head was wrapped in the deceased’s clothing, which helped relatives identify the victim as Sambhu Mallick. A forensic examination confirmed that the head and the torso belonged to the same individual.

Trial Court’s Verdict

The Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court, Siliguri, framed charges against all three accused under Sections 302, 201, and 34 IPC. After evaluating the evidence, the court found the accused guilty and sentenced them to life imprisonment on February 11, 2005.

High Court’s Judgment

The accused appealed to the Calcutta High Court. While the prosecution sought to uphold the conviction, the defense argued that there was insufficient evidence linking the accused to the crime. The High Court ruled that there was enough circumstantial evidence against Dilip Mallick but acquitted Hira Routh and Khogesh Bansfore due to lack of evidence. The conviction of Dilip Mallick under Section 302 IPC was confirmed.

Petitioner’s (Dilip Mallick) Arguments

The appellant challenged the conviction on the following grounds:

• The prosecution relied on circumstantial evidence, lacking direct witnesses to the crime.
• The recovery of the victim’s severed head and weapon was based on statements made during police custody, which were unreliable.
• The last seen theory was weak, as the prosecution failed to establish a continuous link between the accused and the crime.
• The co-accused were acquitted, which should have created doubt regarding Dilip Mallick’s role.

Respondent’s (State of West Bengal) Arguments

The State of West Bengal, defending the conviction, argued:

• The accused was last seen with the deceased, and there was no explanation regarding the victim’s whereabouts after that.
• The accused misled the deceased’s family when they inquired about him.
• The discovery of the severed head and weapon was made based on the accused’s disclosure, reinforcing the case against him.
• The post-mortem examination and forensic reports confirmed the nature of the injuries, establishing a case of homicide.

Supreme Court’s Observations

Justice L. Nageswara Rao, delivering the judgment, stated:

“The facts in cases of circumstantial evidence should be consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt of the accused, and the circumstances should be of conclusive nature.”

“The burden of proof in a case where the accused was last seen with the deceased shifts to the accused to explain what happened thereafter.”

The Court noted that PW-3, PW-4, and PW-5, all family members of the deceased, consistently testified that Sambhu Mallick was last seen with the accused at around 2:00 PM on February 2, 2004. The accused failed to provide an explanation for the events that followed.

Key Evidence Considered by the Supreme Court

• Last seen theory: Witnesses confirmed that the accused took the victim away, and he never returned.
• Misleading statements: The accused told the victim’s wife to visit Matigara Police Station, raising suspicion.
• Post-mortem report: Multiple stab wounds and beheading confirmed intentional homicide.
• Discovery of severed head: The accused led police to the location, corroborating their involvement.

Final Verdict

After reviewing the evidence and legal arguments, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Dilip Mallick under Section 302 IPC and dismissed the appeal. However, it noted that the prosecution failed to prove the charge under Section 201 IPC (causing disappearance of evidence), leading to the accused’s acquittal on that charge.

Impact of the Judgment

• Reaffirmed the legal principle that circumstantial evidence can be sufficient for conviction if it forms a complete chain.
• Emphasized the importance of the last seen theory in criminal cases.
• Highlighted the duty of accused persons to provide an explanation in cases of unexplained disappearances.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Dilip Mallick vs. State of West Bengal reinforced the judiciary’s approach to cases based on circumstantial evidence. The verdict emphasized the duty of accused individuals to provide reasonable explanations when last seen with a victim, ensuring a fair balance between prosecution and defense rights.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Dilip Mallick vs State of West Bengal Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 14-02-2017.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Fraud and Forgery
See all petitions in Judgment by L. Nageswara Rao
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments February 2017
See all petitions in 2017 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category