Summary
The Supreme Court affirmed the appellants’ murder convictions with unlawful-assembly liability and life sentences. The injured eyewitness, corroboration and weapon recoveries established the attack and common object. Occurrence outside the appellants’ homes did not establish that the complainants were aggressors or justify self-defence. Non-explanation of the accused’s simple injuries, which medical evidence indicated could be self-inflicted, did not undermine the prosecution. The appeals were dismissed.
Issues
- Whether self-defence and unexplained injuries displaced the evidence establishing the unlawful assembly and murders.
Held
- The injured witness’s account was corroborated and supported by recoveries. The courts properly found an armed unlawful assembly with the common object to murder the victims. (¶ 7)
- Who was the aggressor required assessment of the whole incident, not merely its location outside the accused’s houses. The visitor was unarmed and the appellants armed; the self-defence plea was rightly rejected on the circumstances. (¶ 8)
- Non-explanation of an accused’s injuries is not invariably fatal. Material significance depends on serious injuries connected with the occurrence. Here the injuries were simple and could be self-inflicted according to the doctors, so failure to explain them did not invalidate the otherwise proved case. (¶¶ 9, 10)
- The concurrent convictions under Sections 302/149 and other offences, with the imposed imprisonment, warranted no interference. The appeal concerned the present appellants rather than reopening the High Court’s acquittal of the women accused. (¶¶ 6, 11)
Result
Appeals dismissed; appellants’ convictions and sentences, including life imprisonment under Sections 302/149, affirmed.