Summary
Eleven men were tried for the 1994 murder of Bhagat Singh in Vidisha district, Madhya Pradesh; the trial court acquitted six and convicted five under Sections 148 and 302 read with 149 IPC, and the High Court affirmed. The conviction rested on the testimony of the deceased's brother, who claimed to have been walking ahead of the deceased and to have seen the accused attack him with ballams, rods and lathis before fleeing. The Supreme Court acquitted the appellants. Two other prosecution witnesses, corroborated by two defence witnesses, deposed that the brother was at home when a villager told him that Bhagat Singh was lying dead on the road, whereupon he wept and went to the spot; he therefore could not have seen the incident.
Issues
- Whether a conviction for murder can rest on the sole testimony of the deceased's brother as an eyewitness when other prosecution and defence witnesses show that he learnt of the death from a villager while at home.
- Whether medical evidence of a homicidal death can corroborate a witness's claim to have seen the assault, and whether proof of motive alone can sustain a conviction.
Provisions considered
- Sections 148 and 302 read with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860The convictions for rioting armed with deadly weapons and murder by an unlawful assembly were set aside because the only eyewitness was shown not to have been present; the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. (¶¶ 1, 22, 24, 25)
- Appreciation of a sole witness (Vadivelu Thevar v. State of Madras), Indian Evidence Act, 1872Oral testimony falls into three classes — wholly reliable, wholly unreliable, and neither; a court may convict or acquit on a single witness of the first class, can do neither on one of the second, and must seek corroboration in material particulars only for the third. The brother's evidence was wholly unreliable, so the High Court's search for corroboration in the post-mortem report was misplaced. (¶¶ 12, 13, 14, 22)
Held
- PW-3 and PW-4 deposed that a villager (DW-3) told the deceased's brother (PW-6), while he sat at home, that Bhagat Singh was lying dead on the route, after which he became nervous, wept and went with others to the spot; DW-3 and DW-4 fully corroborated this. Defence witnesses must receive the same treatment as prosecution witnesses, and on this evidence PW-6 could not have witnessed the incident. (¶¶ 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21)
- PW-6 being a wholly unreliable witness, no conviction could rest solely on his testimony; the medical evidence could establish only that the death was homicidal and could not corroborate his claim to have seen the assault, and the mere establishment of motive cannot sustain a conviction. (¶¶ 22, 23, 24)
Result
Appeals allowed; the Madhya Pradesh High Court's judgment of 06.08.2019 in Criminal Appeal No. 317 of 2000 and the trial court's judgment of 18.04.2000 in Sessions Trial No. 248 of 1996 set aside; the appellants acquitted of all charges and directed to be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case.