The reliability of eyewitness testimonies and the sufficiency of evidence are crucial in establishing guilt in criminal cases.

Anjuli Palo, J.

This appeal arises out of judgment dated 17th April, 2007 passed by the Court of Special Judge [SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act], Bhopal in Special Case No.17/2006, whereby the trial Court convicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 324 of the IPC and sentenced for life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/-and R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.1,000/-respectively along with default stipulations.

2. The prosecution story in brief is that in the intervening night of 14th and 15th November, 2005 one Vijay informed the complainant Bhimrao that the appellant committed murder of Vinod. Hence, the complainant Bhimrao and his family members went to the house of appellant situated at Panchsheel Nagar and found that Vinod was lying dead. One Anil Tatya was also present there, who has been assaulted by the appellant. He informed that the appellant killed Vinod by inflicting blows of stone on his head. Bhimrao lodged the FIR at Police Station, T.T. Nagar, Bhopal. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed against the appellant for the offences under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC.

3. The trial Court framed charges under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appellant abjured guilt and claimed to be tried. The trial Court relied the testimonies of injured eye-witness Anil (PW-5) and eye-witness Vijay (PW4). It was held that the ocular evidence of aforesaid witnesses was corroborated by Dr. M.S. Khan (PW-11) and Dr. D.S. Badkur (PW-2). Hence, the appellant was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 324 of the IPC and sentenced as mentioned above.

4. The accused challenging the findings of learned trial Court on the grounds that the prosecution witnesses Vijay (PW-4) and Anil (PW-5) had good relations with the deceased Vinod. The trial Court wrongly ignored the material contradiction or omission in the prosecution evidence. Hence, the appellant has prayed to set aside the impugned judgment and further prayed for his acquittal from the charges levelled against him.

5. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

6. Learned Govt. Advocate has supported the impugned judgment and submitted that the trial Court has not committed any error in convicting and sentencing the appellant.

7. We have perused the record and by carefully scanning the statements of Anil (PW-5) and Vijay (PW-4), we find that at the time of incident, their presence on the spot is quite natural and reliable.

8. Vijay (PW-4) was cousin brother of the deceased. He has stated that, on the date of incident i.e. on 14th November, 2005 at about 9:00-9:30 p.m. he was standing near the STD shop along with Vinod (since deceased) and 2-3 other boys. The appellant called him and directed to bring some goods. When Vinod objected for the same, the appellant abused him. He caught hold his collar of the deceased and threatened him. They separated them. Thereafter, Vinod and his friends came to drop him in the house. The house of appellant was adjacent to the house of Vinod. The appellant again abused them. Pankaj and Lalit tried to settle their quarrel. Thereafter, the deceased and appellant both had collected Rs.100/-for drinking liquor.

9. Vijay (PW-4) further deposed that he came back to his home for sleeping. At about 1:30-2:00 am in the midnight, the appellant threw stone on his door. When Vijay came to his door, he saw that Anil (PW-5) was coming out from the house of appellant and he shouted that the appellant inflicted blow of stone (Alanga) on the head of deceased. Thereafter, the appellant rushed towards Anil (PW-5) to assault him. After sometime, the appellant came back to his home and threatened Vijay (PW-4) not go to his house, otherwise he will be killed as Vinod has been killed. Due to fear of the appellant, Vijay (PW-4) went to his uncle Bhimrao’s house and informed the incident. They went altogether to the