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