| Headnote |
Issue for consideration:Whether the High Court was justified in acquitting the accusedfor the major offences u/ss. 302 and 307 IPC, and convictingthem only for the offences u/ss. 147, 148, 323, 324, 325/149 andreducing their sentences to the period already undergone by them;and whether contractions in the two statements of the injured eyewitness, one given to police u/s.161 Cr.PC., and the other givenbefore the court, would be sufficient to discredit a witness.Penal Code, 1870 – ss. 304 Part I, 308, 147, 148, 323, 324,325/149 – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – FirstInformation Report by the complainant that seven armed menassaulted his uncle and aunt while they were working in theiragricultural field, causing them grievous injuries, resulting inthe death of the uncle – Incident witnessed by several relativeswho tried to intervene but failed – Conviction and sentence forthe offences u/ss. 302, 307, 323, 324, 325, 447, 147/148 readwith s. 149 – However, the High Court acquitted them for themajor offences u/ss. 302 and 307, and were convicted only forthe offences u/ss. 147, 148, 323, 324, 325/149 – Correctness:Held: This case is of culpable homicide not amounting to murder,and not of murder – Injuries sustained by the assailants could notbe proved in the trial, defence witness stood thoroughly discredited– There were contradictions in the two statements of an injuredeye witness – These contradictions, however, are not enough tocompletely discredit this witness, she is a reliable witness – Somediscrepancies invariably occur in such cases taking into accounther rural back ground – Reasons assigned for disbelieving thestatement of the eye witness by the High Court not correct – Apartfrom this eye-witness, there were other eyewitnesses as well –Also recovery of the weapons and the blood-stained cloth of theaccused – In view of these contradictions, benefit of doubt givento the accused – As regards premeditated attack, the attack wouldcome u/s.300 Exception 4, the attack not being premeditated, butwas, “in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarreland without the offender having taken undue advantage or actedin a cruel or unusual manner” – Thus, the approach of the HighCourt was not correct – Order of the High Court set aside andquashed – Conviction u/s. 302 converted to that of s. 304 Part Iand that of s.307 to s. 308 and are sentenced accordingly – Caseabates against the accused who expired. [Para 27-32]Witness – Contractions in the two statements, one given topolice u/s.161 Cr.PC., and the other given before the court –Credibility:Held: Contractions in the two statements may or may not besufficient to discredit a witness – s. 145/155 of the 1872 Act, haveto be carefully applied in a given case – Purpose of the crossexamination of a witness is to bring contradictions in the twostatements of the witness – Rural setting, the degree of articulationof such a witness in a court of law are relevant considerationswhile evaluating the credibility of such witness – Lengthy cross-examination of witness may invariably result in contradictions –However, these contradictions not always sufficient to discredit awitness – Evidence Act, 1872 – ss. 145/155. [Paras 20 and 22]Witness – Injured eye-witness – Evidentiary value:Held: Statement of an injured eye-witness is an important pieceof evidence which cannot be easily discarded by a Court – Minordiscrepancies do not matter. [Para 26]Code of Criminal Procedure, 1963 – s. 161 – Statement givento police during investigation under – Evidentiary value:Held: Cannot be read as an “evidence” – It has limited applicabilityin a court of law as prescribed u/s. 162 – No doubt statement givenbefore police during investigation u/s. 161 are previous statementsu/s 145 of the Evidence Act and thus can be used to cross examinea witness – But only for limited purpose, to “contradict” such witness– Even if the defence is successful in contradicting a witness, itwould not always mean that the contradiction in the two statementswould result in totally discrediting the witness. [Paras 18 and 19] |
