9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Conviction under Section 302 of the Penal Code based on eyewitness testimony and approver's evidence. Analysis: The case involved the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Penal Code based on the testimony of the sole eyewitness, Ghanshyam, and the approver, Ratnakar Prusti. The High Court upheld the conviction primarily relying on Ghanshyam's testimony, despite discrepancies between his evidence and that of the approver. The Trial Court had acquitted all accused due to disbelief in Ghanshyam and the approver. The High Court's decision was based on the assessment that Ghanshyam's testimony was more reliable, even though the approver's evidence was concurrently discarded. The High Court's reliance on Ghanshyam's testimony was criticized due to serious infirmities in the case, such as the late tendering of pardon to the approver and lack of corroboration for his evidence. The High Court's evaluation of Ghanshyam's testimony was questioned due to various inconsistencies and omissions in his evidence. Ghanshyam's failure to disclose the names of the accused immediately after the incident, as well as discrepancies in his statements to different individuals, raised doubts about the reliability of his testimony. The High Court's dismissal of these crucial points and its reliance on Ghanshyam's testimony without considering the lack of light at the crime scene, where identification of the assailants would have been challenging, further weakened the prosecution's case. The Trial Court's reasoning for rejecting the eyewitness testimony was based on the lack of sufficient light at the crime scene, making identification improbable. The discrepancies in Ghanshyam's actions and statements after the incident, along with the absence of immediate disclosure of the accused's names, cast doubt on the credibility of his testimony. These serious infirmities led the Supreme Court to conclude that the evidence of the sole eyewitness was unreliable, resulting in the acquittal of the appellant and his release from imprisonment. In summary, the Supreme Court overturned the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Penal Code, emphasizing the inconsistencies and shortcomings in the eyewitness testimony and the approver's evidence. The Court found the prosecution's case lacking in credibility and reliability, leading to the appellant's acquittal and immediate release.
|
