Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to the murder of Madhavrao Krishnaji Gabare on 08.04.2006 in Village Singi, Maharashtra. Twenty-two persons were accused, and nine were convicted by the Trial Court under Sections 148, 302, and 324 read with Section 149 IPC. On appeal, the High Court acquitted six accused but sustained the conviction of Accused Nos. 2, 3, and 5 under Sections 302 and 148 IPC. Accused No. 2 did not appeal, while Accused Nos. 3 (Saheb) and 5 (Sitaram) appealed to the Supreme Court. The prosecution's case relied heavily on the testimony of Janakibai (PW-1), the widow of the deceased, as the other eyewitnesses were disbelieved by the High Court. The Supreme Court examined the inconsistencies in PW-1's testimony, noting that her deposition before the Trial Court differed materially from her initial complaint. She claimed to have seen the attack clearly due to moonlight, but there was no corroboration regarding the moon's phase or brightness. The court also noted that a key eyewitness, Annapurnabai, was not examined. The Supreme Court held that the sole testimony of PW-1 was unreliable, embellished, and raised reasonable doubt. Consequently, the court allowed the appeals, set aside the conviction, and acquitted the appellants.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Murder - Unlawful Assembly - Sections 302, 148, 149 IPC - Sole Eyewitness Testimony - The appellants were convicted for murder based solely on the testimony of the deceased's widow (PW-1). The High Court had discarded other eyewitnesses. The Supreme Court found PW-1's testimony to be inconsistent, embellished, and uncorroborated, raising reasonable doubt. Held that conviction cannot be sustained on such unreliable evidence (Paras 6-12). B) Evidence Law - Appreciation of Evidence - Sole Eyewitness - Corroboration - In a case of brutal murder, the court must ensure guilt is proved beyond reasonable doubt. The sole eyewitness's testimony must be credible and consistent. Here, PW-1's deposition contradicted her initial complaint and lacked corroboration from other witnesses or medical evidence. Held that benefit of doubt must be given to the accused (Paras 6-11).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Sections 302, 148 read with Section 149 IPC can be sustained solely on the basis of the testimony of the sole eyewitness (PW-1) which was found to be inconsistent and uncorroborated.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the conviction of the appellants under Sections 302, 148 read with Section 149 IPC, and acquitted them of all charges. The appellants were directed to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Benefit of doubt
- Sole eyewitness
- Uncorroborated testimony
- Inconsistencies
- Reasonable doubt
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 149 IPC
- Section 148 IPC
