Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Gulab, Sunil, Kamal, Amol, and Durgabai, were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Buldana in Sessions Case No.65/2017. Gulab and Sunil were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC for murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. Kamal and Durgabai were convicted under Section 324 read with Section 34 IPC for causing hurt and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year. Amol was acquitted. The prosecution case was that on the date of incident, the deceased was assaulted by the accused with sticks and iron rods due to a land dispute. The sole eyewitness was the brother of the deceased, who claimed to have seen the incident. The trial court relied on his testimony and convicted the appellants. The High Court, on appeal, found that the eyewitness was an interested witness being the brother of the deceased, and his testimony suffered from material contradictions and improvements. There was no independent corroboration. The medical evidence did not support the specific roles attributed to each accused. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the common intention to cause death. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted all appellants.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appreciation of Evidence - Interested Witness - Testimony of a close relative, though not necessarily unreliable, requires cautious scrutiny and corroboration - The sole eyewitness was the brother of the deceased, an interested witness, and his testimony contained material contradictions and improvements - Held that conviction cannot be based solely on such testimony without independent corroboration (Paras 10-15). B) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Common Intention - Section 34 IPC - The prosecution failed to prove the common intention of all accused to cause death - The overt acts attributed to each accused were not clearly established - Held that the conviction under Section 302 read with 34 IPC is unsustainable (Paras 16-20). C) Criminal Law - Hurt - Section 324 IPC - The evidence regarding the injuries caused by accused Kamal and Durgabai was inconsistent and lacked medical corroboration - Held that the conviction under Section 324 read with 34 IPC is also liable to be set aside (Paras 21-23).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 302, 324 read with 34 IPC is sustainable based on the testimony of interested witnesses and lack of independent corroboration.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Buldana in Sessions Case No.65/2017 is set aside. The appellants are acquitted of all charges. Their bail bonds stand cancelled.
Law Points
- Appreciation of evidence
- Interested witness
- Corroboration
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 324 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- Circumstantial evidence
- Benefit of doubt
