Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Jony @ Abdul Rahim Abdul Khalik Shaikh, was convicted by the IInd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan in Sessions Case No.22 of 2000 for the murder of Mukhtar Ahmed Khan under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution case was that on 21.5.1999, the deceased was standing on the road with his scooter when the appellant and two others attacked him. The sole eyewitness was the deceased's daughter, Tahsin, who claimed to have seen the incident. However, her testimony was inconsistent: she did not name the appellant in the First Information Report (FIR) and her court testimony contained contradictions regarding the identity of the assailant and the events. The appellant appealed against the conviction. The High Court, after reappreciating the evidence, found that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The court noted that the eyewitness's evidence was unreliable and that there were material discrepancies. Consequently, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Conviction based on sole eyewitness - Appeal against conviction - The appellant was convicted for murder of Mukhtar Ahmed Khan. The sole eyewitness, the deceased's daughter, gave inconsistent testimony regarding the identity of the assailant and the sequence of events. The court held that the prosecution failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt as the evidence was unreliable and contradictory. (Paras 2-5) B) Evidence Law - Appreciation of Evidence - Sole Eyewitness - Inconsistencies - The court scrutinized the evidence of the sole eyewitness and found material contradictions and improvements. The witness had not named the appellant in the FIR and her testimony in court was not consistent with her earlier statements. The court held that such evidence cannot form the basis of conviction. (Paras 3-5) C) Criminal Procedure - Appeal - Acquittal - Benefit of Doubt - The court allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence, and acquitted the appellant, giving him the benefit of doubt due to the prosecution's failure to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) for murder is sustainable based on the evidence of the sole eyewitness and other circumstances.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence passed by the IInd Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Kalyan in Sessions Case No.22 of 2000 on 23.12.2002 are set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the offence under Section 302 IPC. He is directed to be set at liberty forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Benefit of doubt
- Inconsistent evidence
- Unreliable eyewitness testimony
- Failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt
