The judgment highlights the importance of critically evaluating solitary eyewitness testimony and the potential impact of material improvements and discrepancies on the reliability of such testimony.

MEHTAB S. GILL, J.

1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the Additional sessions Judge, Hissar dated 5.11.1996/7.11.1996 whereby he convicted vijender Singh, Satbir alias Minka and Sardul Singh alias Dula under section 302 read with Sections 120-B/34 IPC and sentenced them to undergo various sentences under different sections.

2. The case of the prosecution is unfolded by the statement Ex. PN of Tek Chand given to S. I. Mohinder Singh on 24.5.1994 at 2.15 P. M. in police Station Agroha. Tek Chand has stated that my maternal brother satbir, Galli, Teka and Ved Parkash son of Gulaba, all residents of village dharsul had committed the murder of Baba Maheshpuri in 1991. Tek chand is confined in jail and the other three are on bail. The said case was fixed for today i. e. on 24.5.1994 for evidence in the Court of Shri pritam pal, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hissar. After attending and hearing of the case, Tek Chand and Vedi alias Ved Parkash started for village dharsul on a Rajdoot motor cycle bearing registration No. HYJ/6165. The motor cycle was driven by Vedi and complainant was sitting on the pillion.

3. They had to reach village Dharsul via Agroha. At about 1.30 P. M. when they reached near the houses of Balmikis in village Chikanwas, two young men on a Bullet motor cycle came from the side of Hissar. The driver of the bullet motor cycle, had fair complexion and was stoutly built. He was wearing a bushshirt of cream colour of check design with half sleeves. The pillion rider of the motor cycle was holding a pistol in his right hand.

4. On overtaking them, the pillion rider fired a bullet from his pistol on Vedi alias ved Parkash towards his right armpit. On receipt of the bullet shot, tek chand and Vedi alias Ved Parkash along with the motor cycle fell down on the kacha portion of the road. The rider of the Bullet motor cycle drove away towards Agroha. Tek Chand got up and when he went to check the condition of Vedi alias Ved Parkash, he found that he had breathed his last.

5. Tek Chand tried to stop vehicles plying on the road, but no one stopped. Subsequently, Phool Singh Chowkidar, resident of village Chikanwas reached the spot. Tek Chand further stated that Vedi alias Ved parkash was got murdered by Sardul Singh alias Mansa Singh, Jat Sikh, resident of jamalpur Sheikhan by hatching a conspiracy. Vedi alias Ved Parkash was a co-accused in the murder of Baba Maheshpuri. Sardul Singh was wanting a share in the land of the Baba. It was because of this reason, Sardul singh got Vedi alias Ved Parkash murdered by some unknown persons. On the basis of this statement, FIR Ex. PN was recorded on 24.5.1994 at 2.15 P. M. The special report reached the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hissar on the same day at 4.15 P. M.

6. The prosecution to prove its case brought into the witness box manphool alias Phul Singh as PW1, C. Umed Singh as PW2, HC hans Raj as PW3, HC Santu Ram as PW4, C. Nand Lal as PW5, C. Mohinder singh as pw6, HC Mandroop as PW7, Mangtu Ram as PW8, Tek Chand as pw10, satyawan as PW11, Ramesh Kumar as PW12, ASI Sadhu Ram as pw13 and SI Mohinder Singh as PW14.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that this is a case of solitary eye witness account. His testimony should be scrutinized with utmost care and caution. There are material discrepancies and improvements made in the statement he has given in Ex. PN and in his testimony before the Court. Tek Chand PW10 has stated that he left hissar along with deceased Vedi alias Ved Parkash at 1 P. M. after attending to a court case. Appellants Vijender Singh and Satbir came on a motor cycle and appellant Vijender Singh with a.315 bore country made pistol ex. P19, shot at the deceased. He remained at the spot for half an hour and it is thereafter he went on a motor cycle to Police Station Agroha.

8. Investigating officer SI Mohinder Singh PW14 has stated in his testimony, that Tek chand PW10 came to him at about 1.30 P. M. and he left for the place of o