Daya Ram & Ors. Vs. State of Haryana
|
Head Note
Indian Penal Code,1860 - Section 302 , Section 34
Murder - Conviction - Eye witness - Relation witness - Testimony of - Ocular account of the incident presented by the PW 3 has been in graphic details - He did not vacillate in identifying the appellants - He also could relate the weapons of assault used by them - Injuries sustained by the deceased in course of the incident and those detected in the post-mortem examination are compatible with each other - Seizure of the weapons of assault vis-à-vis the appellants based on their statements of disclosure and the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, also establish their irrefutable nexus with the crime - As per the testimony of the doctor performing the post-mortem examination, the time of death does tally with the one of the incident - Testimony of PW 3 not liable to be rejected on the ground that his conduct had been unusual at the place of the occurrence, he having kept himself aloof therefrom instead of attempting to save his brothers who were under murderous attack by a group of assailants - On being confronted with such an unforeseen and sudden situation, it is quite likely that individuals would react differently and if the PW 3, being petrified by such unexpected turn of events, being in the grip of fear and alarm, as a matter of reflex hid himself from the assailants, his version of the episode is not liable to be discarded as a whole as the same is otherwise cogent, coherent and compact - Participation in the gory brutal attack of the appellants with the lethal weapons resulting in death of two persons is proved beyond reasonable doubt - Findings recorded by the courts below upheld.
Topic(s)-Murder - Conviction Upheld