A sole eyewitness's testimony can be sufficient for conviction if it is credible and corroborated by medical evidence, establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

This criminal appeal is directed against the Judgment of conviction dated 15.6.2017 and order of sentence dated 22.6.2017 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Simdega in Sessions Trial No. 191 of 2013, whereby and whereunder, the appellant having been found guilty of charge under Sections 4 49 and 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Section 3 /4 of the Prevention of Witch (DAAIN) Practices Act, 1999 and has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 3 02 IPC and other sentences for the other offences.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the entire case is based on the testimony of the sole eye witness i.e. P.W. 6, who is none but the son of the deceased. He also submits that on the basis of the sole eye witness, it would not be proper to convict the appellant for commission of the offence under Section 302 IPC. It is his contention that the motive of murder has not been spelt out. He further argues that all the other witnesses are related witnesses. The I.O. never seized the blood stained earth nor the murder weapon. He also argues that the behaviour of P.W. 6 was suspicious as he had seen his mother being attacked, but surprisingly he did not take any step to save her.

3. Counsel for the State submits that P.W. 6 is the eye witness of the occurrence and the natural witness as the entire occurrence had taken place inside the compound of the house of the deceased. He also argued that admittedly there was no outsider in the house. It is his further contention that P.W. 1 also stated that at that point of time, the informant was present in the house. He lastly submits that the medical evidence also supports the ocular evidence, thus there is no question of acquitting the appellant.

4. The FIR is at the instance of P.W.6, who is the son of the deceased, in which he stated that his mother was tying the cattle in the courtyard when he was also present there. This appellant armed with a balua (a sharp cutting weapon) entered the house and branding the deceased as a witch gave the first blow on the back side of the neck, thereafter second blow was given on the shoulder and the hand. The informant tried to save his mother, but this appellant with the weapon, chased him, as a result of which, he fled to save himself. The appellant thereafter left when the informant came and saw his mother dead.

On the aforesaid fardbeyan, FIR being Simdega P.S. Case No. 101 of 2013 was registered. After investigation, the police submitted chargesheet under Sections 4 49 , 302 IPC and Section 3 / 4 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act against this appellant. Accordingly, cognizance of the offence was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. Charges were framed against the appellant under three heads i.e. under Section 4 49 , 302 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Sections 3 /4 of the Prevention of Witch (DAAIN) Practices Act, 1999, as the appellant pleaded not guilty, he was put on trial.

5. In order to prove the charges against the appellant, the prosecution had examined altogether ten witnesses, who are as follows:-

6. Several documents were also exhibited, which are as follows:-