LexTHAMAN KUMAR versus STATE OF UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A THAMAN KUMAR r- v. ~ STATE OF UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH MAY 6, 2003 B [S. RAJENDRA BABU AND G.P. MATHUR, .IJ.] Penal Code, 1860-Section 302 read with Section 34-Evidence Act, 1872-Section 3-Murder-Appreciation of evidence-Prosecution case- c Reliability of-Prosecution case that constables on patrolling duty witnessed accused strangulating deceased to death by rolling over bed sheet around his neck-Acquit/al-Conviction by High Court-Justification of- Held: Since there is no inconsistency between testimony of eyewitnesses and medical evidence, there is documentary evidence and also FIR lodged promptly, prosecution case proved beyond any shadow of doubt-Thus High Court rightly D set aside the acquit/al-Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970, section 2. Evidence Act, 1872: Sections 8 and 3-Murder-Motive-Failure to prove by prosecution- E Held: If ocular evidence is trustworthy and corroborated by medical evidence, failure to prove motive is of no consequence-Accused person can be convicted Section 3-0cular testimony and medical evidence-Conflict between- Reliability of-Discussed. F According to the prosecution, accused persons strangulated deceased- rickshawpuller to death by rolling over the bedsheet around his neck. Constables who were on patrol duty heard shrieks raised by the deceased when they passed in front of the deceased's house. They witnessed the incident. Thereafter, they caught A 2 and A-3 on the spot but A-1 managed G to escape by scaling the rear boundary wall. Constables then informed about the incident at mid night to police post by telephone. Sub-inspector came to the spot and recorded the statement of one of the constables. Thereafter FIR was registered. Sessions Judge framed charges under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC against accused. Sessions Judge disbelieving the prosecution case acquitted the accused, however, High H 1190 r r THAMAN KUMAR''· STATE OF UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH 1191 Court convicted them. Hence the present appeal. A-I contended that the injury found on the body of the deceased could not have been caused in a manner deposed to by the eye-witnesses; and that the chadar produced in Court was converted into a rope by twisting and according to the witness, the thickness of the same in the middle was about 6/7 ems and the ligature mark on the neck of the deceased was 1/2 cm in width and this was not possible. A-2 and A-3 contended that Session Judge rightly gave benefit of doubt to appellants and acquitted them and High Court erred in reversing A B the findings; that the prosecution has failed to prove any motive on the C part of appellants to commit crime; that the roaster of duty of constable was withheld by the prosecution, therefore, it is not possible to accept their version that they were on patrol duty; that in the first telephonic message given to police post at mid night the names of the assailants were not mentioned; and that having regard to the height of rear wall and fencing A-1 could not have manage to run away by scaling the same. D Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: I. In the instant case there is no inconsistency between the testimony of the eye-witnesses and the medical evidence and the case of E the prosecution does not suffer from any infirmity on that account. Prosecution has succeeded in establ.ishing its case against accused-appellants beyond any shadow of doubt and the view taken by the Sessions Judge was wholly perverse which was rightly set aside by the High Court. (1202-G; 1204-F, GI 2. The connict between oral testimony and medical evidence can be of varied dimensions and shapes. There may be a case where there is total absence of injuries which are normally caused by a particular weapon. There is another category where though the injuries found on the victim F are of the type which are possible by the weapon of assault, but the size and dimension of the injuries do not exactly tally with the size and G ·dimension of the weapon. The third category can be where the injuries found on the victim are such which are normally caused by the weapon of assault but they are not found on that portion of the body where they are deposed to have been caused by the eye-witnesses. The same kind of inference cannot be drawn in the three categories of apparent conmct in H 1192 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2003] 3 S.C.R. A oral and medical evidence enum
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.