Evidence reliance on Section 164 CrPC statements is inadequate when witnesses become hostile, illustrating the need for corroboration and admissibility standards in criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

P. M. RAVAL, J.

1. The present appeals are directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 14.2.2014 in Sessions Case No.26 of 2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gondal whereby the learned trial Court was pleased to convict the appellants – accused.

2. Since the judgment and order of conviction under challenge in all the captioned appeals is the same, the appeals were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.

3. The case of prosecution is that PW 48 [Police Inspector, Gondal City Police Station] received an anonymous telephone call on 14.11.2011, at about 2050 hours, disclosing Mahant of a temple (hereinafter referred to as "the deceased"] was creating a nuisance on Gundala Road. The said anonymous telephone call was registered vide Station Diary Entry No. 29 of 2011 [Ex.151]. Therefore, PSI RL Dave [PW:46] and his subordinates proceeded towards the scene of incident, but did not find anyone at the temple or in the Aashram or nearby vicinity. However, soon thereafter, they found dead body of the Mahant lying on the wasteland situated behind the Ashram, and therefore PSI, Shri RL Dave [PW:46] informed about the same to the concerned police station [Ex:154]. The PW:46 drew inquest panchnama at Ex:29 in presence of PW:3 and PW:4 on 15.11.2011 at about 0100 at midnight. The dead body was identified by PW:40 and thereafter it was sent for autopsy purpose at government hospital at Gondal, and thereafter it was sent to Rajkot. Upon the autopsy, the medical officer- PW:45 primarily came to conclusion that the Mahant died of injuries sustained all over the body and head with blunt substance. It is the case of prosecution that during the course of investigation, two witnesses namely Devang @ Pintoo Maheshbhai Bhojani and Bhavesh Madhubhai Bhojani [PW:33-34} appeared before the Investigating Officer and got their statements recorded. Allegedly both these witnesses declared before the Investigating Officer that they had video graphed and photographed the entire incident which led to death of the Mahant. They allegedly produced video cassette of the CD and three cameras in which the entire incident was allegedly recorded under panchnama-Ex:35-97. When the investigating officer saw the CD, the appellants were allegedly identified. It is also alleged that statements of several witnesses were recorded at [Exh:158- 161] under S.164 of CrPC by the learned Magistrate who was examined as one of the witnesses during trial as PW:47. It is also case of prosecution that during the course of investigation, they had drawn panchnama [Ex:44] of the ashram where the Mahant used to live, and found photo copies of application dated 14.11.2011 purported to have been prepared by the deceased Mahant, disclosing that several persons, excluding the accused appellants were likely to assault the deceased Mahant.

4. On the basis of the aforesaid, the appellants were arrested and at the end of the investigation, charge-sheet was submitted before the Court of competent jurisdiction. However, the case being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, was committed to the learned Additional Sessions Court where it came to be numbered as Sessions Case No. 26 of 2012. The learned trial Court framed charge against the accused persons. On the accused pleading not