2007 (5) TMI 677 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Legitimacy of the High Court's reversal of the Trial Court's acquittal.
2. Credibility and reliability of the eye-witnesses.
3. Adequacy of the prosecution's evidence.
4. Examination of independent witnesses.
5. Motive behind the crime.

Summary:

1. Legitimacy of the High Court's Reversal of the Trial Court's Acquittal:
The appellants challenged the High Court's judgment that overturned the Trial Court's acquittal. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court was justified in setting aside the acquittal as the Trial Court's judgment was found to be "highly unsatisfactory" and based on "irrelevant or inadmissible evidence." The High Court meticulously addressed each reason provided by the Trial Court and found the acquittal to be perverse and unreasonable.

2. Credibility and Reliability of the Eye-Witnesses:
The Trial Court doubted the presence and testimony of the eye-witnesses (PW-5, PW-8, PW-12, and PW-13) due to their familial relationship with the deceased and their alleged failure to raise an alarm during the incident. However, the Supreme Court observed that the eye-witnesses were not inimical to the accused and had no reason to falsely implicate them. The High Court found the eye-witnesses' testimonies credible and reliable, noting that their evidence was consistent with the medical evidence.

3. Adequacy of the Prosecution's Evidence:
The Trial Court disbelieved the prosecution's case on several grounds, including the absence of independent witnesses and the alleged improvements in the eye-witnesses' testimonies. The Supreme Court, however, found no basis for these conclusions and emphasized that the eye-witnesses' evidence was sufficient to establish the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt.

4. Examination of Independent Witnesses:
The appellants argued that the non-examination of independent witnesses weakened the prosecution's case. The Supreme Court noted that there is no "straight jacket formula" regarding the necessity to examine independent witnesses and that the credibility of the eye-witnesses was sufficient in this case. The Court also highlighted that the presence of villagers at the crime scene did not necessarily mean they were all eye-witnesses.

5. Motive Behind the Crime:
The prosecution established that the motive for the crime was the appellants' grievance against the deceased for neglecting their sister, Kalawati. The Trial Court found this motive unrealistic, but the Supreme Court disagreed, stating that the motive was plausible and supported by the evidence on record.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's judgment, finding no merit in the appeal and dismissing it. The High Court's decision to convict the appellants u/s 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentence them to life imprisonment was affirmed.