LexANIL PHUKAN versus STATE OF ASSAM
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
...., ANILPHUKAN A v. STATE OF ASSAM MARCH 17, 1993 (DR. AS. ANAND AND N.P. SINGH, JJ.] B Indian Penal Code, 1860: Sections 302 and 34-Appellaht and his brothers inflicting blows on c deceased-Prosecution case that words and abuses exchanged between appel- lqni and deceased regarding repaymellt of loart-Later assault ensuetf--Medi- -,, ~ cal evidence consistent with theory that deceased assaulted by only on~ ptrsort-#'hether conviction can be based on the testimony of sole eye witness-Held accused entitled to benefit of doubt . . D The prosecution alleged that the appellant borrowed a sum of Rs. 450 from the deceased and had executed two hand notes Ex. 7 and Ex. 8, promising to repay the amount on 21.3.1976. On the said date the deceased accompanied by his nephew, PW .3 proceeded to the village of the appellant and as he was getting late, PW .3 carried with him a torch light. E ~ The distance of the house of the deceased from that of the appellant was about one furlong. The appellant was present in the fields in front of his 'house and on being asked as to why he had not come to return the money, he asked them to wait there and proceeded towards his house. When the - appellant did not return for some time, the deceased alongwith PW .3 proceeded-towards the house of the appellant when they found him and F his two brothers coming towards them variously armed, one had a crow- ~- bar while the others had a crooked dao and a kupi dao with them. PW .3 apprehended some danger from the appellant and his brothers, but his uncle told him that since they had done no wrong, they need not be afraid of any assault. On coming near the deceased and PW.3, one of the G brothers gave a blow with a crowbar, while the other two brothers as- saulted the deceased thereafter. PW .3 pulled the deceased towards his ~-. boose and implored the accused not to assault him. At the asking of bis uncle PW .3 ran away to his house and gave the information to the wife of the deceased and also narrated the occurrence to PW.4. The wife of the deceased went to PW.6, and after telling him as to what bad been told to H 389 .. 390 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1993) l. S.C.R. A her by PW 3 she requested him to accompany her to the place of occnr- .... rence. On reaching the place of occurrence, they found him lying on the spot with injuries on his person bnt he was still alive. Two of the PWs brought a bullock cart and PW.7 after lifting the body with some difficulty brought it to his house and kept it in the verandah. However, before any B medical aid could be provided, the deceased succumbed to the injuries at night. The first information report was lodged at the police station at 1230 p.m. by PW .2. During the investigation, some weapons including an axe were seized from the house of the accused and on the same day one of the c brothers was arrested at 6.45 p.m. and the other two brothers surrendered subsequently in the court. The Investigation Officer prepared a sketch of the place of occurrence and sent the body for post-mortem examination. The appellant alongwith his brothers were tried for offences under section .. ,.- 302/34 !PC for the murder of the deceased, and the Sessions Judge D convicted all the three brothers for the said offence and sentenced them for life. On appeal by the three brothers the Division Bench of the High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of all .the three. E The instant SLP was admitted as regards one petitioner only and notice was issued. The S.L.P. of the s~cond petitioner was dismissed while ~ the third brother did not file any appeal. Allowing the appeal and acquitting the appellant, this court, -- F HELD: 1. Conviction can be based on the testimony of a single eye-witness and there is no rule of law or evidence which says to the contrary provided the sole eye witness ·passes the test of reliability .. So long ~ as the single eye-witness is a wholly reliable witness the courts have no difficulty in basing conviction on his testimony alone. However, where the G single eye- witness is not found to be a wholly reliable witness, in the sense that there are some circumstances which may show that he could have an interest in the prosecution, then the courts generally· insist upon some independent corr.oboration of his testimony, In material particnlars, ~ before recording conviction. It is only when the courts find that the single eye-witness
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.