Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by Prabhash Kumar Singh against his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 for the murder of Ashok Rewani on 22nd January 1993. The appellant and his father (since deceased) were tried and convicted by the Trial Court, and the High Court of Jharkhand confirmed the conviction. The prosecution case, based on the Fardbeyan of Nun Chand Rewani (P.W.3), stated that the deceased was having tea at Mahuwar Chawk around 10 PM when the deceased appellant abused him and exhorted the surviving appellant to kill him. The surviving appellant then shot the deceased twice with a pistol. The cause of death was hemorrhage and shock from a bullet injury, as per the postmortem report and testimony of the autopsy surgeon (P.W.5). The appellant argued that the medical evidence was inconclusive due to absence of charring and recovery of bullet, and that identification at night was unreliable. However, the Court found that the eyewitnesses (P.W.1 and P.W.3) consistently identified the appellant and their presence was not challenged. The High Court had also addressed the issue of digested food in the stomach, relying on Modi's Medical Jurisprudence to hold that digestion may continue after death. The Supreme Court held that the eyewitness account, corroborated by medical evidence, was sufficient to sustain the conviction. The appeal was dismissed, and the appellant, who was on bail, was directed to surrender within four weeks.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Section 302 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Eyewitness Testimony - Conviction upheld where eyewitnesses (P.W.1 and P.W.3) consistently identified the appellant and their presence at the scene was not shaken in cross-examination - Held that clear eyewitness account cannot be demolished merely because weapon or bullet was not recovered (Paras 7, 12). B) Criminal Law - Medical Evidence - Gunshot Injury - Absence of Charring - The autopsy surgeon (P.W.5) opined that injury came from bullet fired from firearm; absence of charring does not negate close range firing as no suggestion was put to the doctor on that aspect - Held that medical evidence corroborated eyewitness account (Paras 8-9). C) Criminal Law - Time of Death - Digested Food in Stomach - Relying on Modi's Medical Jurisprudence, the High Court held that digestion may continue after death in a young healthy person; thus presence of digested food does not disprove prosecution's version of time of occurrence (Para 10). D) Criminal Law - Identification at Night - Visibility - The place of occurrence was within a city near tea shops with sufficient lighting; hence identification of accused by eyewitnesses at night was credible (Para 11). E) Criminal Law - Motive - False Implication - Alleged motive of deceased's relationship with a tribal girl was not supported by evidence beyond suggestions in cross-examination - Held that such plea cannot be examined without evidence (Para 7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction under Section 302 IPC based on eyewitness account and medical evidence is sustainable despite absence of charring, recovery of bullet, and alleged inconsistencies regarding time of death and visibility.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the conviction and life sentence under Section 302 IPC. The appellant, who was on bail, was directed to surrender within four weeks; failing which, the Trial Court was to take necessary steps to ensure he undergoes the sentence.
Law Points
- Eyewitness testimony
- Medical evidence
- Close range firing
- Identification at night
- Motive
- Abatement of appeal on death of accused
