GOVERDHAN & ANR. versus STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Citation: [2025] 1 S.C.R. 657 · Decided: 09-01-2025 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BHUSHAN RAMKRISHNA GAVAI · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 10 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2025] 1 S.C.R. 657 : 2025 INSC 47
Goverdhan & Anr. 
v. 
State of Chhattisgarh 
(Criminal Appeal No. 116 of 2011)
09 January 2025
[B.R. Gavai, K.V. Viswanathan and 
Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh,* JJ.] 
Issue for Consideration
The two accused-appellants and their father-the third accused, were 
convicted by the trial court u/s.302 r/w s.34 IPC for assaulting a 
person with deadly weapons causing his death. High Court upheld 
the conviction of the appellants while setting aside the conviction of 
their father. The complainant (PW-6) who filed the FIR was initially 
projected as the eye witness but later turned hostile during the trial 
and it was only PW-10 (mother of the deceased) who claimed to 
be the eye witness. The conviction of appellants was challenged 
in the instant appeal as being illegal causing grave miscarriage 
of justice to them.
Headnotes†
Penal Code, 1860 – s.304, Part I – Armed assault leading to 
death – Testimony of deceased’s mother (a rustic illiterate 
woman) trustworthy and reliable – Corroboration from other 
evidence – Prosecution case proved beyond reasonable 
doubt  – However, motive not clearly established, though 
appellants fully knew that the bodily injuries caused by them 
were likely to cause death – Conviction accordingly converted 
from s.302 (by Courts below) to Part I of s.304:
Held: 1. Merely because statement of PW-10, mother of the 
deceased, under Section 161 CrPC was recorded belatedly i.e. after 
five days which have been duly considered by the High Court and 
there are some inconsistencies and embellishments in her testimony 
before the trial court, one is not persuaded to take the view that 
PW-10 cannot be an eye-witness and her testimony not credible – 
No material contradiction between the statement made by her 
before the court and the previous statement recorded under Section 
161 CrPC could be shown by the defence under Section 162(1) 
* Author
658
[2025] 1 S.C.R.
Supreme Court Reports
and Explanation thereto as to render her testimony doubtful – A 
careful perusal of the testimony of PW-10 shows that her narration 
of the incident was natural, and trustworthy – PW-10, the mother 
of the deceased, though was related to the victim, cannot by any 
stretch of imagination be said to be an interested witness – As also 
observed by the High Court, there is no reason why the mother 
of the victim should falsely implicate the appellants without any 
rhyme or reason more so when apparently there was no previous 
animosity of PW-10 with any of the appellants – The trial court 
after recording the testimony of the PW-10 and on consideration of 
the same found her evidence trustworthy and credible – There is 
no reason to question the assessment about the credibility of the 
witness by the Trial Court which had the advantage of seeing and 
hearing above the witness and all other witnesses – Even if there 
are certain embellishments and improvements and contradictions 
which are of minor nature, the evidence of PW-10 on the whole 
does appear to be consistent and there is no cogent reason to 
disbelieve her claim that she had witnessed the incident – Thus, 
there appears to be no patent illegality in the view taken by the 
trial court and the High Court. [Paras 79, 80, 81, 83, 84]
2.1. The evidence which has emerged is that the father PW-5 
came to the scene after the assailants appellants had fled – As 
far as the mother PW-10 is concerned, on seeing the assault she 
ran inside to wake up her husband and when they came out, the 
assailants had fled – It cannot be considered to be highly unnatural 
for a woman not rushing to intervene and instead seek the help 
of a male member (her husband) when there were two persons 
with deadly weapons assaulting her. [Para 86]
2.2. The evidence of PW-10, the sole eye witness, a hapless 
rustic illiterate woman visited with the vicissitude and tragedy of 
her son being fatally assaulted by co-villagers before her own 
eyes, has withstood intensive cross examination and judicial 
scrutiny – She has answered the questions put to her during her 
cross examination with spontaneity without any jitteriness and her 
response was natural and not elusive and prevaricating, which all 
are signs of truthfulness of the witness – Therefore, her testimony 
is trustworthy and reliable – Her evidence finds corroboration from 
the admissible part of the evidence of the complainant (PW-6), and 
her husband (PW-5) even though they had turned hostile, and the 
m

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.