Legal Provisions Involved: Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Judgement by: Supreme Court of India
Judge/Bench: Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
Facts
The Appellants attacked Bulaki Mandal and Hriday Mandal following an altercation. The accused were armed with various weapons including garasas, sword, pistol, farsa, bhala, and axe. Both victims died on the spot. The Sessions Court convicted the Appellants, which was upheld by the Jharkhand High Court.
Key Legal Provisions
Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Issues raised
- Whether the testimony of related eyewitnesses could be relied upon to convict the Appellants?
- Whether non-recovery of weapons of assault fatally affects the prosecution case?
Arguments of the case
The Appellants argued that Non-recovery of weapons created doubt about the prosecution case while the Respondent argued that eyewitness testimony was consistent and reliable. Moreover, recovery of weapons is not sine qua non for conviction when reliable ocular evidence exists
Judgement
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction. The Court held that eyewitness testimony was consistent and reliable and non-recovery of weapons does not weaken the prosecution case.
Click here to VIEW the full judgement.
