Eyewitness testimony, corroborated by medical evidence, is sufficient for conviction in murder cases, even with minor discrepancies.

JUDGMENT :

T. AMARNATH GOUD, J.

This present criminal appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , against the impugned Judgment of Conviction and Sentence dated 11.09.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Khowai Judicial District, Khowai, Tripura, in Case No. S.T. (TYPE-1) 05 of 2018. By the said judgment, the learned Sessions Judge, Khowai, Tripura, convicted the appellants for committing an offence punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to suffer life imprisonment. Additionally, the appellants were fined Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) each, with a default sentence of one month of simple imprisonment.

2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that one Madhabi Debbarma lodged a written ejahar with the Officer-in-Charge, Champahaur Police Station, alleging that on 14.02.2017, at about 10:00/10:30 hours, her husband, Samir Debbarma, was attacked indiscriminately with a ‘dao' by the appellants while he was returning from a marriage ceremony. Upon hearing his cries, the informant and others rushed to the spot and found him with bleeding injuries. When the informant questioned the appellants regarding the attack, they also assaulted her. Immediately after the incident, the injured husband of the informant was shifted to Khowai Hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries on 15.02.2017.

3. Upon receipt of the written complaint, the police registered a case vide Champahaur P.S. Case No. 2017 CPH PS/004, dated 15.02.2017, under Sections 341, 302, 325, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After registering the case, the police initiated an investigation and arrested the appellants. Upon completion of the investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the appellants for offences punishable under Sections 341, 302, 325, and 34 of the IPC .

4. After receiving the charge sheet, the learned trial Court took cognizance of the offences and proceeded with the case. Copies of incriminating documents were supplied to the appellants in compliance with Section 200 of the CrPC. Subsequently, the learned Court below framed charges against the appellants for offences punishable under Sections 341, 302, 325, and 34 of the IPC .

5. To prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 27 (twenty-seven) witnesses, whereas the appellants did not adduce any witnesses in their defense. After hearing both sides, the learned Sessions Judge, Khowai, Tripura, vide the impugned Judgment of Conviction and Sentence dated 11.09.2023, in S.T. (T-1) 05 of 2018, convicted the appellants as stated above.

6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned Judgment of Conviction and Sentence dated 11.09.2023, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Khowai, Tripura, in S.T.(T-1) 05 of 2018, the appellants have preferred this instant criminal appeal, seeking to set aside the said judgment.

7. Heard Mr. Sankar Lodh, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, as well as Mr. Raju Datta, learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State-respondent.

8. Mr. Lodh, learned counsel for the appellants, submits that according to the prosecution, P.W.-1 and P.W.-2 are the eye witnesses. However, there are contradictions regarding the place of occurrence and inconsistencies regarding the weapon used to inflict injuries upon the victim. In the depositions of P.W.-1 and P.W.-2, there is a discrepancy concerning the weapon allegedly used by the accused to attack the victim. Furthermore, the supposed eyewitnesses i.e., P.W.-1 and P.W.-2, do not mention each other’s presence or having seen each other at the scene of the incident. According to P.W.-2, after the hue and cry, several individuals i.e., P.W.-14, P.W.-15, P.W.-16, and P.W.-17, arrived at the spot. In fact, P.W.-15 stated that when she asked P.W.-1 about the incident, P.W.-1 replied that she was asleep at that time. These four witnesses arrived immediately after the commission but did not confirm the presence of P.W.-1 and P.W.