Murder Trial – Injured Witness’s Evidence Not At A Higher Pedestal In A Case Of Private Defence Where The Accused Also Injured
Case: Arvind Kumar @ Nemichand & Ors. V. State Of Rajasthan
Coram: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh
Case No.: Criminal Appeal No.753 Of 2017
Court Observation: “The omission on the part of the prosecution to explain the injuries on the person of the accused assumes much greater importance where the evidence consists of interested or inimical witnesses or where the defence gives a version which competes in probability with that of the prosecution one. In the instant case, when it is held, as it must be, that the appellant Dasrath Singh received serious injuries which have not been explained by the prosecution, then it will be difficult for the court to rely on the evidence of PWs 1 to 4 and 6, more particularly, when some of these witnesses have lied by stating that they did not see any injuries on the person of the accused. Thus neither the Sessions Judge nor the High Court appears to have given due consideration to this important lacuna or infirmity appearing in the prosecution case.”
“One has to see the nature of discrepancy in a given case. When the discrepancies are very material, shaking the very credibility of the witness leading to a conclusion in the mind of the court that it is neither possible to separate it nor to rely upon, it is for the said court to either accept or reject.”
“Thus, a deliberate and intentional avoidance of unimpeachable evidence qua motive would make the version of the prosecution a serious suspect.”
“…when the facts are not considered properly by the courts and are contrary to the evidence on record, this Court can certainly invoke Article 136 of the Constitution of India. After all, a criminal case stands on a different footing than that of a civil case where onus lies heavily on the prosecution. There is a conscious attempt not to go beyond the case as projected by the prosecution witnesses.”
“The view that the evidence of an injured witness has to be placed at a higher pedestal may not apply to a case of private defence with the accused also injured.”
[doc id=12191]
Previous Posts
Pension Shall Be Determined On Rules Existing At The Time Of Retirement: Supreme Court
Father Responsible To Maintain Child Till Adulthood: Supreme Court Download Judgement
Keywords
Murder Trial, Private Defence, Injured
