Brief Facts
- The case arises from the facts that the deceased was killed with the knife blows. An FIR was filed by the brother of the deceased stating that the offence was committed by the Appellant and two other individuals. The autopsy surgeon found that the death was caused by shock and haemorrhage due to stab injuries. The medical evidence also stated that the death could not have been caused by the knife recovered.
- The prosecution case was primarily founded on evidence of a distant relative of the deceased, who was presented by the prosecution as eyewitness. Whereas it was argued on behalf of the Appellant that there were substantial inconsistencies and contradictions in the witnesses statements and the eyewitnesses herself as she was not a neutral person.
- The Accused was acquitted by the Trial Court and on appeal to the High Court, convicted the Appellant for the offences under Section 302 and 114 of IPC.
Issues
- Whether the testimony of an eyewitness be discarded merely because of inconsistencies with the medical evidence?
- Whether the deposition of ocular witness would prevail over the medial evidence.
Held
- Apex Court dismissed the appeal and the Appellant who was on bail was directed to surrender before the Trial Court.
- We find nothing which could establish that the eyewitness or post occurrence witnesses were not present at the place of offence or PW2’s description of the incidence was imaginary.
- In the judgment of this Court reported in Darbara Singh v. State of Punjab, 2012 10 SCC 476, this Court has given greater importance to ocular evidence over the opinion of the medical expert.
Relevant Para No.
- 7