Conviction affirmed against Malay Ghosh and wife for murder and evidence concealment of 6½-year-old Tamalika, based on strong circumstantial evidence including last-seen testimony and recovery of body from appellants' locked room.
In a landmark judgment delivered on October 14, 2026, the Calcutta High Court (Division Bench) upheld the conviction and life imprisonment sentences awarded to Malay Ghosh and his wife for the brutal murder of a six and a half-year-old girl, Tamalika alias Pupun. The child was last seen entering the appellants' locked room and was found dead the next morning concealed in a bag hidden under a cot, covered with thermocol pieces.
The tragic incident occurred on July 21, 2011, in a residential compound in Raghunathpur, West Bengal. The victim, a regular visitor to the appellants' home, informed her mother that she was going to Malay Ghosh's room after her tuition. However, when her mother arrived shortly thereafter, the door was bolted from inside and appellant No. 2 falsely denied the child's presence. A desperate search by the family and neighbors ensued throughout the night.
The next morning, the appellants attempted to flee the premises but were intercepted by neighbors and police. Malay Ghosh produced the key to his room, allowing police and witnesses to recover the dead body of Tamalika from the concealed bag. Postmortem examination confirmed homicidal death by strangulation.
The prosecution's case was supported by 24 witnesses including the child's parents, neighbors, and the investigating officers. Crucially, a 10-year-old child witness testified to seeing Tamalika enter the appellants' room on the evening of her disappearance. The appellants' statements under Section 164 CrPC admitted that the murder occurred inside their room, though each blamed the other for the act. Despite having exclusive control over the room and knowledge of the circumstances, the appellants failed to offer any explanation, invoking the legal presumption of guilt under Section 106 of the Evidence Act.
The court carefully scrutinized the circumstantial evidence against the "panchsheel" or five golden principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, which require a complete and consistent chain of circumstances pointing only to the guilt of the accused. The court found that these principles were fully satisfied, and that alternative hypotheses of innocence had been effectively ruled out.
The appellants were convicted under Sections 302/34 (murder with common intention) and 201/34 (causing disappearance of evidence with common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court's sentences of rigorous imprisonment for life with fines were affirmed, and the court ordered forfeiture or cancellation of bail bonds where applicable.
This judgment highlights the judiciary's commitment to delivering justice in heinous crimes against children and underscores the efficacy of circumstantial evidence and legal provisions shifting the burden of explanation onto accused persons in cases where the offence occurs in secrecy. The case also emphasizes the importance of credible eyewitness testimony, including that of child witnesses, and corroborative statements under Section 164 CrPC in establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Bottom Line:
Circumstantial evidence - Child last seen entering appellants' room - Mother immediately told falsely that child had not come - Dead body recovered next morning from bag concealed under cot in appellants' locked room - Appellants attempted to flee and failed to explain facts within their special knowledge under Section 106 Evidence Act - Conviction under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 IPC upheld.
Statutory provision(s):
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 302, 201, 34; Evidence Act, 1872 Sections 27, 106; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Sections 164, 313, 428
Malay Ghosh v. State of West Bengal, (Calcutta)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2996874
