State of U.P. Vs. Satveer & Ors.
|
Head Note
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 , Section 34
Murder - Acquittal - Appeal against Acquittal - Murder - Sole eye witness - Testimony of - Appreciation of evidence - Evidence of the sole witness needs to be considered with caution and after testing it against other material - Such evidence must inspire confidence and ought to be beyond suspicion - Held it is doubtful whether PW2 could be called a natural and truthful witness and could be completely relied upon - The movements of 'A' deceased are also not established to show that he was actually there as suggested by the witness -Even minutest detail was gone into to locate any material which could possibly lend corroboration to the deposition of PW2 but no such material was found - Two facts, that the baithak was of ownership of the respondents and that the body of 'A' was found there, though very crucial, cannot by themselves be sufficient to fix the liability - The baithak was not part of the house, was across the road and apparently accessible to others -Presence of respondentswhether some or all of them, has not been fully established - Material on record definitely falls short and the respondents are entitled to benefit of doubt - View taken by the High Court affirmed and appeals liable to be dismissed.
Topic(s)-Murder - Acquittal