HC Upholds Conviction of Two, Acquits Three in 2010 Political Murder Case

MP, June 12, 2026, Kolkata :  The Calcutta High Court has upheld the convictions of two men in a politically motivated murder committed in 2010 while acquitting three co-accused, holding that the prosecution had proved the roles of the two assailants beyond reasonable doubt but failed to establish the involvement of the others.

A division bench of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Rai Chattopadhyay dismissed the appeal of Mongala Sardar and Bapan Sardar, affirming their convictions and life sentences.

The court, however, set aside the convictions of the three other appellants, finding no clear evidence linking them to the murder.

The case arose from the killing of Prasanta on January 22, 2010.

According to the prosecution, Prasanta and his son were on their way to a local resident’s house to install an asbestos sheet when they were intercepted by the accused because of long-standing political rivalry.

The prosecution alleged that Mongala Sardar fired at the victim and Bapan Sardar attacked his throat with a sharp cutting weapon.

Prasanta’s son, an eyewitness, testified that he was prevented from intervening while the assault took place.

Villagers rushed to the spot after hearing his cries, but the attackers had fled.

Medical evidence showed that the victim died from gunshot and sharp-cut injuries.

The court found that eyewitness testimony consistently identified Mongala Sardar and Bapan Sardar as the two men who carried out the fatal attack.

It also relied on the recovery of a pipe gun and a blade (dah) allegedly concealed after the murder.

A significant aspect of the judgment concerned the credibility of prosecution witnesses, some of whom admitted to facing criminal cases, including allegations connected to the murder of a political rival.

Rejecting the defence argument that such antecedents rendered them unreliable, the bench held that pending criminal cases do not automatically destroy a witness’s credibility.

The court said such evidence must be scrutinised carefully but cannot be discarded solely because of a witness’s criminal background.

Holding that the prosecution had failed to prove any specific overt act or common intention on the part of the acquitted appellants, the bench directed their release if not wanted in any other case.