Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Rambahadur Bhimsingh Vishwakarma, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, on 17th July 2002 for the murder of one person under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. The case arose from an incident where the appellant along with two co-accused was charged for murder. The prosecution's case rested primarily on the testimony of PW-1, the brother of the deceased, who claimed to have witnessed the incident. The trial court convicted the appellant based on this testimony. On appeal, the Bombay High Court examined the evidence. The court noted that PW-1 was an interested witness being the brother of the deceased, and his testimony contained material contradictions and inconsistencies with the medical evidence. There was no independent corroboration of his version. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted. The court directed that the appellant be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Conviction based on sole testimony of interested witness - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The appellant was convicted for murder based solely on the testimony of PW-1, the brother of the deceased, who was an interested witness. The court held that the testimony of an interested witness must be scrutinized with great care and caution, and if there are material contradictions and lack of corroboration, the conviction cannot be sustained. (Paras 1-10) B) Evidence Law - Appreciation of Evidence - Interested Witness - The court reiterated the principle that the evidence of a close relative of the deceased is not automatically unreliable, but it requires careful scrutiny. In this case, the testimony of PW-1 was found to be inconsistent with medical evidence and other circumstances, and there was no independent corroboration. Hence, the appellant was entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 5-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC based on the testimony of a sole eyewitness who is an interested witness is sustainable.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellant acquitted. Directed to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Conviction based on sole testimony of interested witness requires corroboration
- Testimony of close relative must be scrutinized with care
- Benefit of doubt when prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
