Ocular Testimony of Injured Witnesses Corroborated by Medical Evidence Sustains Conviction Despite Investigative Lapses

This appeal arose from a judgment dated 17.12.1987, where the appellants were convicted under Sections 147, 148, 323, and 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The case originated from a long-standing land dispute between the de facto complainant, Mahadeb Ghosh (PW-1), and his cousin, Shib Sadhan Ghosh (Appellant 1).

On 19.09.1983, following a verbal altercation, Appellant 1 allegedly exhorted his sons (Appellants 2, 3, and 4) to "finish" Sankar Ghosh (PW-3).

Appellants 2, 3, and 4 arrived armed with a katari, iron khonch (spear), and hansua, inflicting serious bleeding injuries on PW-3’s chest and on the head of Padmabati Ghosh (PW-6).

While the Trial Court acquitted the appellants of Section 307 (Attempt to Murder), it convicted them of rioting and voluntarily causing hurt with dangerous weapons.

Appellant 1 and Appellant 5 died during the pendency of this appeal.

1. Whether the investigation was void due to the alleged lack of formal empowerment of the Investigating Officer under the Police Regulations of Bengal.

2. Whether the conviction under Section 149 IPC (Unlawful Assembly) could be sustained when fewer than five accused remained active in the appeal process.

3. Whether the ocular testimony of injured witnesses was reliable despite contradictions with medical evidence and the non-examination of some independent witnesses.

4. Whether the substantive sentence should be reduced given the 40-year lapse since the occurrence.

Section 149 regarding constructive liability for members of an unlawful assembly.

Section 324 regarding voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons.

Section 148 regarding rioting armed with deadly weapons.

Section 114(g) of the Indian Evidence Act regarding the adverse inference of withholding witnesses.

The established principle that the testimony of an injured witness carries a higher cachet of credibility because their injuries establish their presence at the scene.

The Court rejected the technical challenges to the investigation, holding that lapses such as the absence of a sketch map or formal entrustment do not erode the evidentiary value of trustworthy direct testimony from injured witnesses.

Regarding the numerical requirement of Section 149 IPC, the court found that the assembly originally consisted of five or more persons at the time of the offense, satisfying the statute despite subsequent deaths of some appellants.

The court emphasized that PW-3 and PW-6, as injured victims, had no reason to falsely implicate the appellants while letting the real assailants go free.

The medical evidence of PW-7 (Dr. Bhar) corroborated the ocular accounts by confirming bleeding injuries caused by sharp/hard weapons on vital areas like the chest.

The court concluded that neither the hostility of some neighbors nor the non-examination of certain FIR-named witnesses (Laxmi and Subal Singh) was fatal given the consistency of the injured witnesses' testimonies.

Noting that 43 years had passed since the incident (1983-2026), that the dispute was familial, and that the surviving appellants were now advanced in age, the Court modified the sentence to the period of imprisonment already undergone.

The appeal abated against Appellants 1 and 5 (deceased) and was dismissed against the others with the aforementioned modification of sentence.