Failure To Secure Presence Of Crucial Witnesses Not Ground To Acquit Accused If Evidence Otherwise Establishes Prosecution Case
Case: Saju v. State of Kerala
Coram: Justice A. Badharudeen
Case No.: CRL.A NO. 331 OF 2007
Court Observation: “It is true that the prosecution is duty bound to examine all material witnesses, particularly, the investigating officer to prove the prosecution case. But such examination is possible in relation to witnesses whose presence could be secured by the means known to law. If a crucial witness or the investigating officer dies or their presence could not be secured for valid reasons, non-examination of crucial witnesses or the investigating officer by itself is not a ground to disbelieve the prosecution case in toto, if the evidence adduced otherwise emphatically established the prosecution case.”
“It appears that the major part of the investigation in this case is that of PW12 and in such a case, non-examination of CW17, the investigating officer, cannot be the sole ground for acquittal of the accused. Therefore, this argument cannot be appreciated.”
Previous Posts
