Issues
- Whether the accused can be convicted on the sole testimony of the eye-witness?
- Whether non-recovery of the weapon and non-examination of the original complainant would be fatal to prosecution in the direct evidence case (eye-witness case)
Held
- The Apex Court set aside the order of acquittal passed by the High Court and restored the conviction of the accused for offence under section 302 and 302/34 IPC on the basis of the testimony of the eye witness.
- Merely because the original complainant is not examined cannot be a ground to discard the deposition of PW1. As observed hereinabove, PW1 is the eye witness to the occurrence at both the places. Similarly, assuming that the recovery of the weapon used is not established or proved also cannot be a ground to acquit the accused when there is a direct evidence of the eye witness. Recovery of the weapon used in the commission of the offence is not a sine qua non to convict the accused. If there is a direct evidence in the form of eye witness, even in the absence of recovery of weapon, the accused can be convicted. Similarly, even in the case of some contradictions with respect to timing of lodging the FIR/complaint cannot be a ground to acquit the accused when the prosecution case is based upon the deposition of eye witness.
- As per settled position of law, there can be a conviction on the basis of the deposition of the sole eye witness, if the said witness is found to be trustworthy and/or reliable. As observed hereinabove, there is no reason to doubt the credibility and/or reliability of PW1. Therefore, it will be safe to convict the accused on the sole reliance of deposition of PW1.
Relevant Para No.
- 7 & 8