Published on: January 26, 2024 at 12:33 IST
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: Birbal Nath V. State of Rajasthan (2023)
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that statement of an injured eye-witness is an important piece of evidence which cannot be easily discarded by a Court and minor discrepancies do not matter in the criminal testimony. It is held that evidence of injured witness has greater evidentiary value and unless compelling reasons exist, their statements are not to be discarded lightly. It is held that the purpose of the cross examination of a witness in terms of Section 145 and 155 of the Evidence Act, 1872 is to bring contradictions in the two statements of the witness, in the case at hand, one given to police under Section 161 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the other given before the Criminal Court.
29. The reasons assigned for disbelieving the statement of PW-2 by the High Court are not correct. The High Court discredits the statement of PW-2 because of the discrepancies in her earlier statement given under Section 161 Cr. P.C., and the one given in her examination-in-chief. This as we have already discussed was not sufficient to totally discredit an injured eye witness. Apart from this eye-witness, there were other eyewitnesses as well, which we have referred above. Further, there is also the recovery made of the weapons and the blood-stained cloth of the accused. There is nothing to doubt either the recovery or the manner in which the recovery has been made. The conclusion derived by the High Court that the assailants were not having common intention or common object of killing deceased Chandernath is not entirely correct.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra