A conviction under Section 302 IPC can be based on a single eyewitness's credible testimony, provided it is substantiated by medical evidence, reflecting intentional infliction of fatal injuries.

Judgment :

Budi Habung, J.

Heard Mr. P. Taffo, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. G. Tado, learned Additional Prosecutor for the State respondent No.1 and Mr. D. Laji, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondent No.2.

2. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the judgment dated 27.07.2023 and the order of sentence dated 28.07.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bomdila, Arunachal Pradesh, in Bomdila Sessions Case No. 06/2023, corresponding to Tawang P.S. Case No. 01/2023, under Section 302 of the IPC , whereby the accused appellant was convicted under Sections 302 and 325 of the and sentenced as follows:

i. Life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) under Section 302 of the IPC ;

ii. Imprisonment for 7 (seven) years with a fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) under Section 325 of the IPC ;

iii. In default of payment of the fines, the accused convict shall undergo simple imprisonment for 3 (three) months in addition to the above sentences.

3. Being aggrieved, the appellant has challenged the order of conviction primarily on the following grounds:

a. The conviction is based solely on the evidence of prosecutrix-P.W.-1.

b. There is no eyewitness to the incident except P.W.-1, and the conviction has been recorded on assumptions and presumptions without being supported by the evidence of any independent witness.

c. In addition to the above grounds of challenge, the learned counsel for the appellant, contends that there was no deliberate intent to cause the death of the child as such and at most the case would fall under Section 304 Part II of the IPC , which deals with culpable homicide not amounting to murder, rather than under Section 302 of the .

BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE PROSECUTION CASE

4. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 22.01.2023, the family consisting of the appellant, his wife (informant-PW-1) with their child (deceased) returned together from Tawang Monastery after attending the Torgey festival. At night, the wife (PW-1) prepared dinner, but the accused denied to have dinner with her. After dinner, when the wife (PW-1) went to sleep with the accused, she found appellant sleeping with a blanket wrapped around his body. When she asked him to extend the blanket so that they could sleep together, quarrel took place between the appellant and his wife. Due to the altercation, the accused became angry and was about to leave the room with their 2 (two) years old minor son. The wife asked him not to take their son. The accused stated that if he was not allowed to take the son, he would kill him. At that time, when the wife attempted to take the son, the accused physically assaulted her, causing dislocation of her left elbow. The accused then held his son’s leg and dashed him twice against the ground.

5. After hearing the noise, the brother-in-law of the accused (PW-2), who resides nearby, came and knocked on the door. The PW-1 opened the door. When PW-2 entered the room, he saw the child in an injured condition and the accused inside the room; however, the accused immediately fled from the room. PW-2, then with the help of P.W.-4, took the wife and the child to the hospital for treatment, but the doctor declared the child “brought dead”. The wife (PW- 1) was found to have sustained severe injuries on her hand. The police were informed, a