SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 1338

2008(6) Supreme 337
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Arijit Pasayat and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.
Ravi — Appellant
versus
State Rep. by Inspector of Police — Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 22 of 2007
Decided on : 05-09-08

Important Point
A court can and may act on the testimony of a single witness though uncorroborated. One credible witness outweighs the testimony of a number of other witnesses of indifferent character.

Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 – Prosecution of accused persons ten in number for causing death of deceased by hacking him with help of choppers – Death of A10 during pendency of trial – Trial Court while acquitting A-5 to A-9, convicted A1to A4 for said offence – Appeal – Dismissed by High Court – Appeal – Plea that PW1 being brother of deceased was interested and a partisan witness and conviction could not be based on his solitary evidence and that there being no question of having sufficient light at the place of occurrence at about 7.15 p.m. PW-1 could not have identified accused – So far as identification aspect was concerned, categorical statement of PW-1 that there was light in the nearby church and the street lights near Primary School were burning at the time of occurrence and he could see the occurrence in that light – Even Trial Court and High Court referred to presence of street lights in Ext.P-20, the rough sketch – Hence plea of identification being not possible held unsustainable – Since accused persons were known to the witness, that was also a relevant factor – Held a court can and may act on the testimony of a single witness though uncorroborated – Contention that in a murder case the court should insist upon plurality of witnesses, held to be much too broadly stated – Moreover instantly recovery under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872 was there – M.O.8 series, four Vettu Kathis were recovered by Investigating Officer on basis of confessional statement of A-1 – Impugned judgment of High Court not suffering from any infirmity so as to warrant interference – Appeals dismissed. (Paras 8, 9, 13, 14)

       Facts of the Case :

       1.Accused persons ten in number were prosecuted herein in the instant case for causing death of deceased by hacking him with help of choppers. A10 died during pendency of trial. Trial Court while acquitting A-5 to A-9, convicted A1to A4 for said offence. Appeal thereagainst was dismissed by High Court.

       2.Present appeals have been filed against said order of High Court.

       Findings of the Court :

       So far as identification aspect was concerned as per categorical statement of PW-1 there was light in the nearby church and the street lights near Primary School were burning at the time of occurrence and he could see the occurrence in that light. Even Trial Court and High Court referred to presence of street lights in Ext.P-20, the rough sketch. Hence plea of identification being not possible held unsustainable. Since accused persons were known to the witness, that was also a relevant factor. Held a court can and may act on the testimony of a single witness though uncorroborated. Contention that in a murder case the court should insist upon plurality of witnesses, held to be much too broadly stated. Moreover instantly recovery under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, 1872 was also there. M.O.8 series, four Vettu Kathis were recovered by Investigating Officer on basis of confessional statement of A-1. Impugned judgment of High Court was not suffering from any infirmity so as to warrant interference.

       Result : Appeals dismissed.

Judgment

Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J. —

1.Challenge in these appeals is to the Judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court. Two persons have filed the appeal and the appellant Ravi was A-1 in Criminal Appeal No. 22 of 2007, and Ravi, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 2007 was A3. Ten persons had faced trial before the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Kanyakumari. During the pendency of trial one of them i.e. A-10 died and the charge against him had abated. A-5 to A-9 were acquitted by the trial Court and the remaining four were appellants before the High Court. A1 to A4 were convicted for offence punishable under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ‘IPC’).

2.Prosecution version in a nutshell are as follows :

There was previous enmity between the elder brother of Albert Walter (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) i.e. Robert Victor Singh (P.W.1) and Al and one Sasi, residing at R.C. Street, Monday market. There was a case that, Al had hacked Sasiat his leg. In the murder case related to one Kumar, deceased Albert Walter was implicated as an accused. On 24.12.1991, when P.W.1 and deceased were going near Neyyoor Hospital, Al to A4 chased the deceased. On 7.1.1992, when P.W.1, deceased and one Ranjith Singh were coming towards the south from Neyyoor Mission Hospital, opposite to the Primary School, at around 7 or 7.15 in the night, Al to A4 armed with choppers in their hands chased deceased who ran from north towards the south. Near the house of one Shahul Hameed, Al to A4 caught hold of deceased. A1 hacked him at his neck, jaw and right cheek. A-2 hacked deceased at his right hand and back. A3 hacked him on his head 3 times with a chopper. A4 hacked him on his abdomen. Consequent to the injuries inflicted by Al to A4, he died at the very place of occurrence. The occurrence was witnessed by P.W.1, Ranjith Guna Singh (PW 2) and Jagdeesh Chandran (PW3) in the light shed by the electric light near the place of occurrence. P.W.1, at around 8.30 in the night, went to the Police Station, Eraniel and lodged a written complaint Ex.P.1 signed by him regarding the occurrence. At the time of occurrence Albert Walter was wearing a shirt M.0.1 and a lungi M.0.2.

On 7.1.1992, at around 8.30 in the night, when the Sub-Inspector P.W.13 was on duty in charge of the station, as per the complaint Ex.P-1 given by P.W.1, a case was registered in Crime No.10/92 u/s 302 IPC. The First Information Report and the complaint statement were sent to the Court. The copies of these were sent to the higher officials. When P.W.17 was in-charge as the Circle Inspector, Eraniel on 7.1.1992, at 2100 hrs., he received the FIR in this case and took up the case for investigation. He visited the place of occurrence at 21.15 hrs and observing it in the presence of the witnesses prepared the observation mahazar Ex.P.2. Shelvasdas (P.W.6) was present along with him and attested as a witness to Ex. P.2. P.W.17 prepared the Rough sketch Ex-P.20. He made arrangements for photographing the place of occurrence. He conducted inquest in the presence of the Panchayatdars. The Inquest Report prepared by him is Ex.P.21. During the inquest, P.W.17 enquired the witnesses. He entrusted the corpse to Selvamani (P.W.12) Constable with the requisition of conducting post-mortem, Ex.P.14 to the Medical Officer, Colachel. From the place of occurrence, the Inspector P.W.17 seized M.O.3 blood-stained earth, M.O.4 sample earth and prepared the mahazar Ex-P.3 in the presence of P.W.6 who attested it as a witness. As per the requisition of the Police Department, P.W.14 took photographs of the place of occurrence. The photos taken by him are M.0.6 series and their negatives M.O.7 series. As per the Orders of the Inspector, on 8.1.1992, P.W.12 took the corpse of Albert Walter under his responsibility, then after the inquest was over, he took the corpse to the doctor and entrusted the same for post-mortem examination. After the post-mortem was over, he received the corpse








































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top