2023 SCMR 478
Minor discrepancies in evidence of witness --- As long as the material aspects of the evidence have a ring of truth , courts should ignore minor discrepancies in the evidence - Test is whether the evidence of a witness inspires discrepancy goes to the root of confidence - If an omission or the matter , the defence can take advantage of the same --- While appreciating the evidence of a witness , the approach must be truth - Minor discrepancies on trivial matters not affecting the whether the evidence read as a whole appears to have a ring of material considerations of the prosecution case ought not to prompt the courts to reject evidence in its entirety --- Such minor discrepancies which do not shake the salient features of the prosecution case should be ignored .
Death sentence --- Recovery of weapon inconsequential due to no crime empties being recovered from crime scene --- When ocular account is believed to be inspiring confidence and trustworthy , mere the fact that recovery ( of weapon ) is inconsequential by itself could not be a ground for imposing a lesser penalty than death sentence on the accused .
Prosecution witnesses related to the deceased -- Mere relationship of the prosecution witnesses with the deceased cannot be a ground to discard the testimony of such witnesses especially when their relationship with the assailant is ( also ) close .
Minor discrepancies in ocular account and medical evidence --- Not significant --- Casual discrepancies and conflicts appearing in medical evidence and the ocular version are quite possible for variety of reasons ... During occurrence when live shots are being fired , witnesses in a momentary glance make only tentative assessment of the distance between the deceased and the assailant and the points where such fire shots appeared to have landed and it becomes highly improbable to correctly mention the location of the fire shots with exactitude --- Minor discrepancies , if any , in medical evidence relating to nature of injuries do not negate the direct evidence as witnesses are not supposed to give photo picture of ocular account --- Even otherwise , conflict of ocular account with medical evidence being not material and not imprinting any dent in prosecution version would have no adverse effect on prosecution case .
Qatl - i - amd --- Reappraisal of evidence --- Incident took place at 10.00 a.m. in the morning whereas the matter was reported to the police at 10:30 a.m. on the same day while the inter se distance between the place of occurrence and the Police Station was six kilometer --- Such aspect clearly reflected that the matter was reported to Police promptly without there being any delay - As the occurrence has taken place in the broad daylight and the parties were known to each other , therefore , there was no chance of misidentification --- Ocular account was furnished by the complainant and another witness , who were subjected to lengthy cross - examination by the favourable to the accused or adverse to the prosecution could be defence but nothing produced on record --- Complainant was inmate of the house where the occurrence took place , therefore , his presence was natural --- So far as the presence of the other witness was concerned , it was admitted position that at the relevant time . the wedding ceremony of the deceased lady was taking place cases was a rare and he being a close relative had come to complainant's house to attend the ceremony --- Medical evidence available on the record corroborated the ocular account so far as the nature , time , locale and impact of the injuries on the person of the deceased was concerned --- Counsel for the accused could not point out any reason as to why the complainant would falsely involved the accused in the present case and let off the real culprit Substitution in such like phenomenon --- Complainant would not prefer to spare the real culprit who murdered his daughter and falsely involve the accused , who was his son - in - law and maternal nephew , without any reason --- Neither the defence seriously disputed the motive part of the prosecution story nor the prosecution witnesses were cross - examined on this aspect of the matter --- Admittedly , the accused remained absconder for a period of about six months and the same was also a corroboratory piece of evidence against him --- Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case , even if the recovery of weapon of offence was excluded from consideration , still there was ample evidence in the form of unimpeachable and trustworthy ocular account , medical evidence and motive to sustain conviction of the accused on the capital charge --- Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed , leave was refused and death sentence awarded to the accused was maintained
0 Comments