Failure of Independent Corroboration and Unnatural Conduct of Interested Witnesses Vitiates Conviction Based on Enmity.

The deceased, Buddhu Paswan, was allegedly shot dead on October 17, 2004, at a village Panchayat Bhawan

The informant (PW-5), mother of the deceased, claimed five accused persons (Adalat, S.B., Kara, Durgi, and Shivdayal Paswan) approached and shot the victim multiple times

The prosecution relied on the testimony of the mother (PW-5) and daughter-in-law (PW-3), as well as medical evidence of firearm injuries

Two accused died during trial/appeal

The Trial Court convicted the appellants under Section 302/34 of the IPC, primarily relying on the consistency of PW-5’s testimony

The appellants challenged the conviction on grounds of interested testimony, material contradictions regarding the place of occurrence, and lack of independent witnesses

1. Whether the prosecution established the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt given the alleged contradictions in the place of occurrence and identification?

2. Whether the testimonies of the related/interested witnesses (PW-3 and PW-5) are reliable in the absence of independent corroboration despite the incident occurring in a public place?

The court applied Section 302 (Murder) and Section 34 (Common Intention) of the IPC

It applied Section 114(g) of the Evidence Act regarding adverse inference for withholding best evidence, as established in *Gopal Krishnaji Ketkar v. Mohamed Haji Latif*

Regarding the reliability of interested witnesses in cases of enmity, it applied the "heightened scrutiny" principle from *Aslam @ Imran v. State of M.P.*

It further applied the doctrine that medical evidence cannot prove authorship of a crime without a forensic link (*Surendra Koli v. State of U.P.*)

and the "two views" principle, where the benefit of doubt must favor the accused (*Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra*)

The Court found major discrepancies between the ocular testimony and the physical evidence.

While PW-5 claimed the shooting happened on the Panchayat Bhawan veranda with significant blood spillage, the Investigating Officer (PW-7) found the body in an adjacent fallow land with no bloodstains or cartridges at the alleged spot

The Court deemed PW-3’s testimony contradictory as she admitted the assailants’ faces were covered, which negated PW-5’s claim of clear identification

PW-5’s conduct was labeled "unnatural" under the principles of *Shivasharanappa v. State of Karnataka*, as she neither raised an alarm nor physically intervened

Furthermore, the non-examination of independent villagers despite the broad-daylight occurrence and the failure to recover weapons were held as fatal lacunae

The Court noted that long-standing enmity was a "double-edged weapon" that likely led to false implication

The Court ruled that the Trial Court’s findings were "perverse" and based on unreliable evidence

The appeals were allowed, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence were set aside, and the appellants were acquitted of all charges with directions for immediate release