'Conviction Cannot Rest On Contradictions': Calcutta High Court Acquits Brothers In Attempt-To-Murder Case After 19 Years

The Calcutta High Court has set aside the conviction of two brothers, Naba Kumar Koley and Gunadhar Koley, who had been found guilty under Sections 307 and 324 of the IPC for allegedly assaulting their sibling Balai Koley over a dispute relating to Til plants. Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), delivering judgment on April 8, 2026, held that the prosecution's case was riddled with “glaring inconsistencies” and suffered from a completely unreliable evidentiary foundation. The Court observed that the entire episode arose from a long-standing and deeply strained family relationship, marked by not only property disputes but also political rivalries and marital discord within the household, which had split the family into two hostile groups long before the incident.The Court noted that the prosecution witnesses, including the injured himself, provided mutually contradictory accounts of the place of occurrence, the manner of assault, the weapons used, and the sequence of events. The “khamar” where the alleged assault took place was variously claimed to belong to different persons—sometimes the complainant, sometimes a cousin, sometimes located beside a club, and at other times at a bamboo shrub—yet the Investigating Officer failed to ascertain or mention the true location or ownership in the sketch map. In addition, there were serious inconsistencies regarding who carried the injured to the hospital, how the police were informed, and whether the injured was unconscious. The Court stressed that such contradictions went to the very root of the prosecution case.The medical evidence further weakened the prosecution story. The doctor (PW9) found only three simple incised wounds and specifically stated that the injuries could have been caused by falling on sharp objects during a scuffle; one injury could not be caused by a hansua at all. The doctor also did not find any hand injury though the injured claimed one, and recorded that the patient himself provided the history of assault, contradicting the claim that he was unconscious. Importantly, the doctor did not advise hospital admission and discharged the injured the same day, which the Court found inconsistent with the prosecution's portrayal of a brutal attack with a sharp weapon.Adding to the doubts, an independent witness (PW7) turned hostile and stated that what he saw was only a heated exchange, pushing, and the injured falling on bamboo, after which he suffered cuts—directly supporting a defence theory of accidental injury during a scuffle. The Court found this version more consistent with the medical evidence than the prosecution's narrative of a targeted hacking assault with a hansua.The Court also criticised the investigation, noting that the IO did not seize blood-stained earth, did not examine key adjoining residents, did not send the alleged weapon to the FSL, and produced a seizure list with no place or time mentioned. It emerged during trial that the seizure was actually conducted at the police station, not at the place of occurrence, making it wholly unreliable. The seizure witnesses themselves admitted they had not seen the seizure at the spot.The High Court held that the testimony of the injured witness lacked the qualities of a “sterling witness” as explained by the Supreme Court in Rai Sandeep v. State (NCT of Delhi), since his version was neither consistent nor corroborated by medical or other evidence. The prosecution, the Court concluded, failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Case: GUNADHAR KOLEY vs. STATE OF WEST BENGALCase No: CRA 588 OF 2010Click here to read order

'Conviction Cannot Rest On Contradictions': Calcutta High Court Acquits Brothers In Attempt-To-Murder Case After 19 Years

Srinjoy Das

Tags