Anadi Tewari
The Supreme Court has today observed that mere non-examination of an independent witness is not fatal to the case of the prosecution when other prosecution witnesses are fully trustworthy and reliable.
The bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah was hearing a criminal appeal against the judgment passed by the Allahabad High Court by which the High Court has allowed the said appeal preferred by the State and has reversed the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court acquitting the accused of the offences.
Background of the Case
The prosecution (deceased) was the Pradhan of the village for more than two decades. The accused were having grudge against him. On 6th October 1981, the deceased was going, as usual, to attend the call of nature towards the bank of river Yamuna situated near his village. When the deceased was on his way, all the four accused suddenly emerged out. They had a pistol, lathis, spear with them.
The Four accused then attacked the deceased and crushed his head and the deceased received his instantaneous death on the spot.
On completion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer filed the charge sheet against the four accused. The Session Court acquitted all the four accused. Being aggrieved with the order of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court, the State preferred an appeal before the High Court. The High Court set aside the order of the Sessions Court and held the accused guilty of the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860.
Aggrieved of the decision of the High Court, the accused has appealed before the top Court.
Arguments before the Supreme Court
The appellant (accused) has submitted before the Court that:
- The High Court has exceeded in its jurisdiction in reversing the well-reasoned judgment of the Sessions Court.
- The motive has not been established and proved.
- All the prosecution witnesses – so-called eyewitnesses – PW1 to PW4 are all related and interested witnesses; no independent witness has been examined.
- As rightly observed by the learned trial Court, PW2 & PW4 are the chance witnesses.
The respondent has submitted before the Court that:
- Being the first appellate court against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court, the High Court is justified in re-appreciating the entire evidence on record and coming to its conclusion.
- It is submitted that when the witnesses who are examined are found to be reliable and trustworthy, mere non-examination of the independent witnesses shall not be fatal to the case of the prosecution.
- It is submitted that in the present case the eyewitnesses PW2 & PW4 have fully supported the case of the prosecution and therefore the High Court has rightly convicted the accused.
Observations of the Court
The Supreme Court has gone on to affirm the High Court’s observation where the high court has stated that where there are clinching evidence of eyewitnesses, mere non-examination of some of the witnesses/independent witnesses and/or in absence of examination of any independent witnesses would not be fatal to the case of the prosecution.
The Supreme Court while dismissing the appeal application has taken reference to various of its decisions and has stated that:
“10.2 In the recent decision in the case of Surinder Kumar v. State of Punjab (2020) 2 SCC 563, it is observed and held by this Court that merely because the prosecution did not examine any independent witness, would not necessarily lead to the conclusion that accused was falsely implicated. 10.3 In the case of Rizwan Khan v. State of Chhattisgarh (2020) 9 SCC 627, after referring to the decision of this Court in the case of State of H.P. v. Pardeep Kumar (2018) 13 SCC 808, it is observed and held by this Court that the examination of independent witnesses is not an indispensable requirement and such non-examination is not necessarily fatal to the prosecution case.”
The top court while rejecting the appeal has further observed that:
“The prosecution witnesses have fully supported the case of the prosecution, more particularly PW2 & PW4 and they are found to be trustworthy and reliable, non-examination of the independent witnesses is not fatal to the case of the prosecution.”
The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Allahabad High Court.
Case: Guru Dutt Pathak v. State of Uttar Pradesh [Criminal Appeal No. 502 of 2015]