Mere Suspicion of Assumption Can’t Lead to Conviction: HC in 1995 Case

Soumyadip Mullick, MP, 24 April 2025 :  Kolkata: Observing that mere suspicion of assumption cannot lead to conviction, the Calcutta High Court set aside the judgment and order of the trial court that convicted a man in 1995 under the Essential Commodities Act. The bench of Justice Ananya Bandopadhyay heard the challenge to the judgment and order.

The man was intercepted by the District Enforcement Officer (DEO) and police officers while he was carrying three bags of paddy on his cycle. Upon enquiring about the paddy, the appellant allegedly disclosed that he had purchased six maunds of paddy for the purpose of business. The appellant allegedly failed to produce any valid license or authority for dealing in paddy. The paddy, along with the cycle and other articles, was seized, and the appellant was arrested.

The amicus curiae representing the appellant submitted that the petition of complaint, treated as the FIR, did not disclose the commission of any cognizable offence. The state counsel argued that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt and that the appeal should be dismissed.

The court observed that both the oral and documentary evidence on record failed to establish that the appellant had purchased the paddy for the purpose of trading or selling it to others. Further, the court remarked: “Apart from the assertion of 6 maunds of rice being recovered from the possession of the appellant, it was not weighed or quantified. Mere suspicion or assumption cannot lead to the conviction of the appellant in the absence of proper evidence.”

Observing that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, the court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and order.