Minor inconsistencies do not undermine the credibility of injured witnesses.

The prosecution alleged that, following a dispute over the removal of a peg to which the informant’s goat was tied, the appellants assaulted the informant and her family. Appellant no. 2 was alleged to have struck the informant’s son with a farsa, causing an incised head injury; both appellants were also alleged to have assaulted family members with a lathi.

The trial court convicted appellant no. 2 under Section 324 IPC and both appellants under Sections 323 and 447 IPC, imposing concurrent terms of imprisonment.

The appellants challenged the convictions, alleging false implication, inconsistencies in the evidence, and failure to examine independent witnesses.

1. Whether the evidence of the injured witnesses was sufficient to sustain the appellants’ convictions under Sections 324, 323 and 447 IPC, despite the alleged inconsistencies and absence of independent witnesses

2. Whether the sentences imposed by the trial court warranted interference

The Court applied Sections 323 and 324 IPC, concerning voluntarily causing hurt and voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means, respectively, and Section 447 IPC, concerning criminal trespass.

It also relied on the evidentiary principle that an injured witness’s testimony ordinarily carries credibility, as such a witness is unlikely to shield the actual offender and falsely implicate an innocent person; minor inconsistencies do not, by themselves, destroy that credibility.

The judgment cites no specific precedent.

The Court found that the testimony of the injured witnesses established the appellants’ overt acts and that the appellants had not substantiated their alternative account of the occurrence through supporting witnesses.

It considered the alleged inconsistencies and the absence of independent witnesses insufficient to displace the injured witnesses’ credibility.

The Court therefore found no basis to disturb the convictions, but modified the sentence to the period already undergone.

The sentences were reduced to the periods already undergone, and the appellants were discharged from their bail-bond liabilities.