The single judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court held that unless and until attention is drawn to a witness to his earlier statement contradiction cannot be taken in terms of Section 145 of the Evidence Act.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the informant and his brother were looking at the agriculture feed and the appellants variously armed with Lathi came and conjointly assaulted both of them. Furthermore, when the alarm was raised, the father came to his rescue and he was also assaulted.
The charge sheet was filed under Sections 341, 323, 504, 307, 324, 325/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Court held that the charge under Section 307 of the IPC was not proved and convicted under Sections 323, 324, 325/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The Appellant submitted that the oral evidence is not corroborated by the medical evidence. It was furthermore submitted that the IO in the present case has not been examined and the place of occurrence has not been established. Also, the weapon used has been stated to be a lathi in the FIR whereas, in the examination-in-chief, he has stated that the weapon of offence is Farsa.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble Court observed that exaggerations per se do not weaken the evidence, but they may be a factor in determining how credible the prosecution's version is. Discrepancy has to be distinguished from contradiction.
The court relied upon the judgment titled Abdul Sayeed Vs State of MP.
It was furthermore observed that from the evidence, it is clear that the attention of the informant was not drawn to the FIR. Contradiction cannot be considered in accordance with Section 145 of the Evidence Act unless and until a witness's prior statement is brought to light.
It was noted that one inaccurate mention of the date of occurrence will not completely dislodge the prosecution case.
Based on these considerations, the court was of the view that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and affirmed the judgment passed by the lower court.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court dismissed the appeal.
Case title: Shrawan Paswan Vs The State of Jharkhand
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Case No.: Criminal Appeal (S.J.) No. 594 of 2012
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. Pravin Kumar Pandey, Advocate
Advocate for the State: Ms. Priya Shrestha, Special P.P
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :