Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Shankar Shrirang Gulik, was convicted by the Trial Court under Section 302 IPC for the murder of Chhaya Shinde and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution's case was based on the ocular evidence of the deceased's 12-year-old daughter (PW-1), who claimed to have witnessed the appellant assaulting her mother with a stick on 05.07.2012. The incident allegedly occurred due to illicit relations between the appellant and the deceased, and the appellant's persistent demands for her to live with him. The Trial Court accepted the child witness's testimony and convicted the appellant. On appeal, the High Court scrutinized the evidence of PW-1 and found several inconsistencies and contradictions. The child witness had made improvements in her testimony, and her version was not corroborated by other witnesses, including PW-2 (her brother) and PW-5 (a neighbor). The medical evidence did not support the manner of assault as described by PW-1. The High Court held that the testimony of a child witness must be examined with great caution, and in this case, it was not reliable enough to sustain a conviction. The court also noted that the prosecution had failed to prove the motive beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appreciation of Evidence - Child Witness - Corroboration - Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Section 118 - The court examined the reliability of a child witness's testimony and held that while a child witness can be competent, the court must scrutinize the evidence with care and caution. In the present case, the testimony of the 12-year-old daughter (PW-1) was found to be inconsistent, contradictory, and lacking in corroboration on material particulars, rendering it unsafe to base a conviction solely on her evidence. (Paras 6-12) B) Criminal Law - Murder - Circumstantial Evidence - Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The prosecution's case rested primarily on the ocular evidence of a child witness. The court found that the child's testimony was not reliable due to improvements and contradictions, and there was no other corroborative evidence to support the prosecution's version. The court held that the appellant was entitled to the benefit of doubt and acquitted him of the charge under Section 302 IPC. (Paras 13-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC based solely on the testimony of a child witness aged 12 years is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted of the charge under Section 302 IPC. Fine, if paid, to be refunded. Appellant to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Appreciation of evidence of child witness
- Corroboration of child testimony
- Standard of proof in criminal cases
- Benefit of doubt
