Summary
The Court affirmed the appellant’s murder conviction for chasing an intervening victim and striking his head twice with a sickle. Treatment of injured witnesses satisfactorily explained the same-day FIR interval, and their relationship to the informant did not undermine their carefully scrutinized testimony.
Issues
- Whether FIR delay, related eyewitnesses or the sudden-fight argument undermined the murder conviction.
Held
- The injured informant was first taken for treatment and police recorded the complaint at the hospital. The explanation had to be assessed in the whole factual context and sufficiently accounted for the delay here. (¶ 8–10)
- The related witnesses were injured eyewitnesses whose injuries were proved. Their evidence required caution but could not be discarded merely for relationship, and careful scrutiny disclosed no reason to doubt it. (¶ 11)
- Armed pursuit and two head blows established murderous culpability. No provocation by the deceased was shown to support reducing the offence on the suggested basis. (¶ 12–13)
Result
Appeal dismissed; Section 302 conviction and life imprisonment with fine affirmed.