Inconsistency between ocular testimony and medical evidence regarding weapons used warrants acquittal in murder trial.

The first informant reported that on March 18, 1984, the three appellants (Babu Ram, Veer Sahai, and Gulab Chandra) took his son, Khet Pal, to a Holi Milan

The deceased never returned, and witnesses allegedly saw the appellants beating him near a tubewell

Babu Ram was allegedly armed with a pistol, Gulab Chandra with a bhala (spear), and Veer Sahai with a lathi

The FIR was lodged on March 21, 1984, after the post-mortem and panchayatnama had already been conducted on March 19

The Trial Court (IVth Additional District & Sessions Judge, Etah) convicted the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC on July 17, 1990

Appellants 1 and 2 died during the pendency of the appeal

1. Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt despite the absence of testimony from the first informant and the doctor who conducted the post-mortem

2. Whether the ocular testimony of PW-1 and PW-2 was reliable given the discrepancy between the alleged weapons (pistol and bhala) and the actual injuries found (lacerations and contusions)

3. Whether an admission of documents under Section 294 of the Cr.P.C. by a counsel remains binding if the accused subsequently denies the documents in their statement under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C.

Section 302 (Punishment for murder) and Section 34 (Common intention) of the Indian Penal Code

Procedural application of Section 294 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) regarding the admission of documents without formal proof, and Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. regarding the examination of the accused

The fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that the prosecution must establish a consistent link between the medical evidence and the ocular testimony to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

While PW-1 and PW-2 claimed Babu Ram fired 3-4 shots, no empty cartridges were found at the scene, and no gunshot injuries were recorded in the post-mortem

Gulab Chandra was allegedly armed with a bhala, yet the injuries were primarily lacerations and contusions; the witnesses' attempt to explain this by claiming the spear was used as a lathi was viewed as an attempt to "give colour" to the story

The Court noted the FIR was strangely annexed to a panchayatnama dated two days prior to the FIR’s official lodging

Since the accused denied the documents in their Section 313 statements, the prior admission under Section 294 by the counsel lost its weight

The behavior of the witnesses—remaining 15-20 steps away without any reaction from the accused—was deemed unnatural

The appeal was allowed, the conviction of Gulab Chandra set aside, and he was ordered to be acquitted of all charges; his bail bonds and sureties were discharged.