2023 SC MR 596
Qatl - i - amd --- Reappraisal of evidence --- Incident took place at 4.30 p.m. and matter was reported to the police and the FIR was lodged on the same day at 06.15 p.m. i.e. just after one hour and forty five minutes of the occurrence --- Keeping in view the inter se distance between the place of occurrence and the police station i.e. 20 kilometer , the FIR was promptly lodged --- Occurrence took place in the broad daylight whereas the parties were known to each other , therefore , there was no chance of misidentification --- Ocular account was furnished by brother of the deceased i.e. the complainant and maternal uncle of the deceased --- Both said witnesses were residents of the same locality where the occurrence took place , therefore , their presence at the place of occurrence on the fateful day , and time was not unnatural --- Prosecution witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross - examination by the defence but nothing favourable to the accused or adverse to the prosecution could be brought on record --- Both witnesses remained consistent on each and every material point inasmuch as they made deposition according to the circumstances that surfaced in the case , therefore , it could safely be concluded that the ocular the furnished by prosecution reliable , account straightforward and confidence inspiring -- Medical evidence available on the record further 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 paint out any plausible reason as to why the complainant had falsely involved the accused in the present case real brother --- Substitution in such like cases is a and let off the real culprit , who had committed murder of his phenomenon --- According to the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory , the crime empties matched with the weapon recovered from the accused --- In these circumstances , there was sufficient material available on record to sustain conviction of 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 .
Minor discrepancies in prosecution case -- Even if there are some minor discrepancies , the same should be ignored if they do not hamper the salient features of the prosecution case - 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 confidence --- If an omission or discrepancy goes to the root of the matter , the defence can take advantage of the same --- While appreciating the evidence of a witness , the approach must be whether the evidence read as a whole appears to have a ring of truth --- Minor discrepancies on trivial matters not affecting the 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 .
0 Comments