Delay in FIR:
There is no dispute with regard to the legal proposition in case the accused is
able to indicate from the evidence on the record that the recording of the FIR
has been delayed or there have been interpolation in the statement forming the
basis of the FIR, it casts doubts on the prosecution story and so an accused is
entitled to get the benefit of doubt.
Injured Witness:
The testimony of an injured witness is attached great value in trial of criminal
cases. The injuries confirm the presence of a witness on the spot. Very
convincing grounds are required to discard the evidence of injured witnesses,
whose injuries would at least permit a reasonable inference that they were
present at the time of the occurrence. 59
The Supreme Court went through the evidence of each of the injured witnesses and
found that they had given the details of occurrence and had clearly named the
assailants. There was thus overwhelming evidence, establishing participation of
the accused, who were figuring as appellants.
It is well-settled that the evidence of an injured witness can be the sole
basis; in fact, the best basis, for either recording or sustaining a conviction.
This is because, injuries ensure the presence of a witness. And once that is
ensured, the limited question which remains is that of his credibility and
truthfulness.
After going through the evidence of Shaikh Jalaluddin, we not only find it to be
truthful, but also in consonance with probabilities and medical evidence.
The time honoured principle is that evidence has to be weighed and not counted.
On this principle, are based the provisions contained in s 134, IEA 1872 which
provides that:
No particular number of witness shall in any case be required for the proof of
any fact.
After weighing the evidence of Shaikh Jalaluddin we find it implicitly reliable
and even sufficient as the sole basis for sustaining the conviction of the
appellant s. Fortunately, plurality of ocular account is forthcoming in the
instant case.
Corroboration is lent to the statement of Shaikh Jalaluddin by those of Adam
Hussain Baig, PW 3 and Anani alias Eknath, material particulars have
corroborated the manner of assault as deposed to by Shaikh Jalaluddin. In
addition, both these witness have stayed that appellant Ramdas Penter also
inflicted a gupti blow on the back of the deceased.
These witness have also given plausible reason s for their presence on the place
of the incident. Adam Hussain PW 3 has stated that at the time of incident , he
stopped at the place of the incident to have a betel leaf from a betel shop,
which was situated there, he had his meals at 7.30 PM and thereafter he
proceeded to pipeline in asalpha village to meet a friend.
At about 8.30 PM, he happened to pass along Dhobi Ghat area and noticed Ramesh
Shelar and jalaluddin Shaikh were sitting on a cot. After he had proceeded about
4 to 5 paces ahead, he saw the four appellant s coming with weapon s and
thereafter saw the assault.
The evidence of Adam Hussain PW 3 and Anani alias Eknath PW 6 is also
corroborated by the medical evidence.
Where serious injuries have been found on the person of the witnesses, their
presence at the place of occurrence can not be doubted by brandling the injuries
as self styled.
Written By: S Kundu & Associates
Email:
[email protected], Ph No: +9051244073
Please Drop Your Comments