Not necessary to prove motive behind offence, when eyewitness testimony is credible: Jharkhand HC upholds conviction

Jharkhand High Court: In a criminal appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20-11-2017 and 27-11-2017, respectively, passed by the Additional Judicial Commissioner-V, Ranchi (‘the Trial Court’), whereby the appellant-convict was found guilty under Section 302¹ of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), the Division Bench of Ananda Sen* and Subhash Chand, JJ., stated  that the testimony of eyewitnesses could not be discredited nor there was any material to disbelieve them and their evidence had not been shaken. The Court stated that when there was an eyewitness, who had seen the commission of murder and their evidence was credible, it was not necessary that the prosecution had to prove the motive behind the offence. Thus, the Court stated that the impugned judgment and order of sentence did not want any interference and accordingly, dismissed the present appeal.

Background

In the present case, an informant stated on 25-03-2012, three friends of his brother-in-law, including the convict came in a house where his brother-in-law was residing, and after taking a meal, they were sleeping together in a room. At 10.30 pm, when Friend 1 raised an alarm, the informant went into the room where they were sleeping and saw that the convict was assaulting his brother-in-law and Friend 2 (‘the deceased persons’) with an axe. Thereafter, the informant caught the convict and locked him in a room and gave information to the police. Subsequently, the police came and took the injured persons to the Hospital for treatment. However, the injured persons were referred to RIMS, Ranchi and was declared dead.

Thus, a case was registered for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC against the convict and subsequently, the Trial Court convicted the appellant.

The convict submitted that there were serious contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses, which damages their case. The prosecution had also failed to prove the motive of commission of murder and when there was no dispute amongst the parties, why the deceased persons would be murdered was a mystery.

Analysis, Law, and Decision

The Court examined the evidence of the doctor and noted that it was stated that the wound of both the deceased were incised and were caused by heavy sharp cutting weapon and rest by hard and blunt substance. Thus, the nature of injury, which the doctor has found, corroborated with the ocular evidence of the informant and Friend 2. Further, so far as the discrepancies pointed out by the convict was concerned, the Court stated that the same was not of much importance to reverse the finding of the Trial Court. Thus, the testimony of eyewitnesses could not be discredited nor there was any material to disbelieve them, and their evidence had not been shaken. The Court also found that the axe and the blood-soaked earth were sent for forensic examination, wherein in its report human blood was found on axe and earth.

The Court referred to Madan v. State of U.P., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1473, and opined that when there was an eyewitness, who had seen the commission of murder and their evidence was credible, it was not necessary that the prosecution had to prove the motive behind the offence. The Court stated that admittedly in the present case, the death was homicidal, and the doctor also found that cause of death was injury, which was inflicted upon the deceased. Further, as held earlier, the ocular evidence corroborated with the medical evidence, as there was nothing to disbelieve in the statement of eyewitnesses.

Thus, the Court stated that the impugned judgment and order of sentence did not want any interference by this Court and accordingly, dismissed the present appeal.

[Ajit Barla v. State of Jharkhand, 2024 SCC OnLine Jhar 2149, decided on 10-06-2024]

*Judgment authored by- Justice Ananda Sen

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Appellant: Bhola Nath Rajak, Advocate;

For the Respondent: Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, A.P.P.