The testimony of a sole eyewitness is sufficient for conviction in a murder case if it is natural, consistent, and corroborative of medical and ballistic evidence. The non-recovery of a weapon or minor contradictions are not fatal to the prosecution's case when other credible evidence exists.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI)

1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 06.10.2022 passed by the learned Sessions Court, Jamnagar in Sessions Case No.138 of 2016, whereby the appellant-accused No.1 came to be convicted for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and Section 25(1B)(a) of the Arms Act, the appellant – accused No.1 has preferred present appeal against conviction.

2. The appellant-accused No.1 has been sentenced for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life, with fine of Rs.5000/-, in default of which, to undergo 1 year simple imprisonment. The appellant-accused No.1 has further been sentenced for the offence under Section 25(1B)(a) of the Arms Act, to undergo 2 years simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of which, to undergo 2 months simple imprisonment.

3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeals are as under:

3.1. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 04.05.2013 at about 22:00 hours, in the sim (outskirt) area of Veraval village, Taluka Jamjodhpur, District Jamnagar, Faruk Ibrahim Pata (hereinafter referred to as “deceased”), a friend of the complainant, had gone to demand money from accused No.1. At that time, accused No.1, knowing fully well that his act was likely to cause death of the deceased, with an intention to cause his death, fired a shot from an unlicensed country-made single barrel gun at the deceased, causing fatal injuries on the right side of his body. Accused No.2 allegedly assaulted the deceased with a stick and caused serious injuries. The incident occurred in violation of the prohibitory order under the Arms Act issued by the District Magistrate, Jamnagar, which was in force at the relevant time and place. Thereby, the accused committed the offences punishable under Sections 302 read with 114 of IPC, Section 25(1B)(a) of the Arms Act and Section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act.

3.2. On the basis of the complaint lodged by the complainant, the offence came to be registered. Investigation was carried out. The accused persons were arrested, muddamal articles including the country-made gun and the motorcycle were seized, and sufficient evidence having been found, a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused persons before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jamjodhpur.

3.3. After committal, the case was made over to the learned Additional Sessions Court, Khambhaliya and thereafter, upon jurisdictional changes, it was transferred to and tried by the learned Sessions Court, Jamnagar as Sessions Case No.138 of 2017. Charge was framed, to which the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

3.4. Upon conclusion of the trial and appreciation of the evidence, the learned Sessions Court, by the impugned judgment and order dated 06.10.2022, convicted the appellant-accused No.1, as stated above. Hence, the present appeal.

4. During the course of the trial, the prosecution examined witnesses and produced documents as detailed below:

:: Oral Evidence ::