When there are several inconsistencies in witness testimony and the evidence of a case, to the extent that the “prosecution version was full of doubts from whatever angle it was looked at” the accused cannot be convicted.
Four co-accused were convicted of killing two people and sentenced to death under PPC 302(b) read with PPC 34. Two other co-accused were given life sentences for causing non-fatal injury and nine co-accused were acquitted because the court did not believe they were actually involved. The High Court acquitted all co-accused of all charges, finding the prosecution’s case fabricated. The complainant alleged that a group of 17 people armed with bore shotguns and rifles entered his courtyard and began shooting, killing two people and injuring others. The Supreme Court upheld the acquittals, noting several issues with the witness testimony, including:
- Independent witnesses were abandoned by the prosecution;
- The brother of the complainant denied that the incident was witnessed by the complainant and thereby contradicted other prosecution witnesses;
- Testimony of prosecution witnesses contradicted the FIR regarding the nature of weapon used by accused;
- The FIR attributed effective shots four accused, and prosecution witness statements attributed effective shots had been attributed to five accused persons. The Court found it humanly impossible to discern who fired which shots in such a situation “reigned by panic and pandemonium;”
- The number of assailants in the circumstances of the case appeared to have been exaggerated;
- A firearm entry wound found on the person of one of the prosecution witnesses allegedly caused by a shot fired from a distance of 13 feet was accompanied by blackening, which is not possible beyond 3 feet.
Finding that that “prosecution version was full of doubts from whatever angle it was looked at,” and noting most of the accused persons had been charged because of previous enmity, the Supreme Court upheld the acquittals.
