PW-41, the investigating officer of the case has
categorically stated in the trial that:
“In course of my investigation I tried my level best to
examine the accused Sushil Choudhury. But he was
not willing to give statement about the incident
which took place in his complex.”
On the other hand, the appellant held a press
conference for declaring some ex-gratia payment to the bereaved
family and reward for the person who would trace out the
assailants. The purpose was to dispel the cloud of suspicion
around him. Such post conduct of the appellant is relevant and
admissible under Section 8 of the Evidence Act.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
A G A R T A L A
CRL.A (J) No.28 of 2014
Sri Sushil Choudhury V The State of Tripura
BEFORE
CHIEF JUSTICE MR. DEEPAK GUPTA
MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA
Dated: 10.12.2015
Citation: 2016 CRLJ(NOC)157 TRI
Print Page
categorically stated in the trial that:
“In course of my investigation I tried my level best to
examine the accused Sushil Choudhury. But he was
not willing to give statement about the incident
which took place in his complex.”
On the other hand, the appellant held a press
conference for declaring some ex-gratia payment to the bereaved
family and reward for the person who would trace out the
assailants. The purpose was to dispel the cloud of suspicion
around him. Such post conduct of the appellant is relevant and
admissible under Section 8 of the Evidence Act.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
A G A R T A L A
CRL.A (J) No.28 of 2014
Sri Sushil Choudhury V The State of Tripura
BEFORE
CHIEF JUSTICE MR. DEEPAK GUPTA
MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA
Dated: 10.12.2015
Citation: 2016 CRLJ(NOC)157 TRI

