HC holds: Judgment of conviction can be based solely on the testimony of the solitary witness if it holds confidence, Read Judgment

The division judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court held that in a case where the testimony of the solitary witness inspires confidence and is wholly reliable, it could be the basis for passing a judgment of conviction and sentence.

Brief Facts:

The factual matrix of the case is that the informant is the daughter of the deceased. It was recorded in the fard byan that her mother was deserted by her father. Then, she came back to her native village, where she was kept by one Raghuvir Singh as his wife. To prevent any conception of the child, she was operated upon. The father of the informant died a few years later, and the victim lady was maintained by Raghuvir Singh. Furthermore, the appellants had chicken and drink in the house, and her mother also had food, then all returned to their home. It was furthermore recorded that Raghuvir Singh sent the appellant, who took her away about 50 yards west from her house and committed rape and murder. Thereafter, the FIR was registered under Sections 302/376/201/34 of the IPC against altogether eight accused persons. The trial court convicted them. Aggrieved by this, the present appeal is filed.

Contentions of the Appellant:

The Appellant contended that neither the post-mortem report brought on record nor the medico-legal examination report has been proved to prove the charge of rape. It was furthermore contended that there is a one-month delay in lodging the FIR. Also, the case of the prosecution rests upon the statement of the informant, which is riddled with contradictions.

Observations of the court:

The Hon’ble Court observed that the law is well settled that in a case where the testimony of the solitary witness inspires confidence and is wholly reliable, it can be the basis for passing a judgment of conviction and sentence.

The court noted that there is an unexplained delay of more than 30 days in lodging the FIR.

The court furthermore noted that in the fardbeyan, Mrityunjai Singh had been named as the person who committed the offence with Sunil Choubey and Mithilesh Chouhan. But the informant states in para 1 Dayanand Sao is one of the accused who committed the offence.

Based on these considerations, the court was of the opinion that the solitary account of the informant cannot be relied upon without any corroboration. The court set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence.

The decision of the Court:

With the above direction, the court allowed the criminal appeal.

Case Title: Mithilesh Chauhan V. The State of Jharkhand

Case No.: Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 337 of 2002 With Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No. 380 of 2002

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary

Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. Abhay Kumar Chaturvedi, Advocate

Advocates for the State: Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. , Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, A.P.P.

Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com