The testimony of a single eyewitness, if found to be credible and reliable, can be sufficient to sustain a conviction, even in a murder case.

( 1 ) CONVICT/appellant (hereinafter referred to as the appellant for the sake of convenience ) has approached this Court through the present appeal with a request for setting aside the impugned judgment and order dated September 29,1992 whereby the learned Sessions Judge found him guilty under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 500. 00. In case of failure to clear the fine the appellant was further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month

( 2 ) IT would be necessary to state in brief the facts which led to the present appeal in order to fully and properly appreciate me points raised by the appellant. The facts as adumbrated in the report under Section 173 Cr. P. C. , F. I. R. and in the statements of the witnesses examined by the prosecution are as follows: that Constable Sube Singh (Public Witness2) was posted at PS Nangloi during the intervening night of lst/2nd July 1988 He was on emergency duty alongwith SI Raghbir Prasad (Public Witness12 ). An information was received at 3. 30 3. 45 p. m. with regard to a murder having been committed at house No. E-194, Shiv Ram Park, within the area of PS Nangloi. The same was recorded vide D. D. No. 3a dated February 2,1988 as a corollaryn whereof Shri Bharat Singh (Public Witness 14), SHO, PS Nangli alongwith SI Raghbir Prasad and other Constables left for the place of occurrence, alluded to above. Inspector Bharat Singh met over there one Bholar (Public Witness7 ). On being questioned with regard to the occurrence Bholar stated that he was a resident of village Shara, District Panipat (Haryana ). Aslam alias Makkar (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) was the son of his brother- in-law. He was married to one Jannat, a co-accused (since dead) near about two years ago. Smt. Jannat was the daughter of Public Witness4 Jami-ud-din. However, after the marriage she returned to her parents after a stay of one day only at the house other husband. He alongwith the elder brother of the deceased known as Karimudin again approached Jami-ud-din (Public Witness4) alias Jammu to send his daughter alongwith them to the house other in-laws. However, Public Witness4 Jami-ud-din did not accede to their request and said that she would be sent after the harvesting season was over. Consequently both of them again called on him with the abovesaid request. This time they met over there one Islam-ud-din i. e. the appellant. The appellant challenged them and declared as to how they would take Jannat alias Shaku alongwith them. On the refusal of Jami-ud-din to send his daughter they got suspicious and tried to enquire as to what was the reason as to why she was not being sent. On enquiries they came to know that Jannat alias Shaku was having illicit relations with the appellant. It led to some altercation also. Thereafter they again returned to their houses. Later on Jami- ud-din (Public Witness4) called on them in the first week of June 1988 with an invitation to the marriage of his son Rattan Khan (Public Witness3) which was to come off on 28th/29th June, 1988. He alongwith the deceased went to the house of Public Witness4 Jami-ud-din on June 28,1988. After attending the marriage they sought leave of Jami-ud-din to leave for their houses whereupon Public Witness4 asked them to take Jannat alias Shaku alongwith them. Jannat alias Shaku, however, on being asked to leave for the house other in-laws declined to accompany the deceased. She bluntly told that she would stay with the appellant. Meanwhile, a police constable came and informed that Jannat alias Shaku had presented some complaint before the police authorities. The deceased went to the office of the police on being summoned by them. After having returned from the police office the deceased informed him that Jannat alias Shaku, co-accused, had agreed to go alongwith her husband on July 2, 1988. After having taken their supper he alongwith the deceased and O