### Relatedness to Victim Does Not Invalidate Testimony of Injured Eyewitness in Double Murder Conviction

On May 29, 2014, the complainant party (Vinod, Ajay, Badal, and others) was waylaid by the accused party near the house of Maithili in Datia

The accused were allegedly pressurizing the complainant party to turn hostile in a pending criminal case

The accused, forming an unlawful assembly, attacked with firearms, a sword, and a lathi

Badal died on the spot from gunshot wounds; Ajay sustained severe head injuries from sword blows and died ten days later in the hospital

Vinod and Shiv Kumar sustained injuries

The Trial Court convicted the appellants under Sections 148, 302/149 (two counts), and 323/149 of the IPC

The appellants challenged the conviction on grounds of being related witnesses, delayed police statements, and lack of common object

1. Whether the deaths of Badal and Ajay were homicidal in nature?

2. Whether the testimonies of related and injured witnesses are reliable despite delayed recording of Section 161 CrPC statements?

3. Whether the accused acted as members of an unlawful assembly in furtherance of a common object?

4. Whether the appellant Chappa @ Harkishan successfully established a plea of alibi?

The court applied Section 302 (Murder), Section 149 (Constructive liability/Common object), and Section 148 (Rioting with deadly weapons) of the IPC

Distinction between "related" and "interested" witnesses as established in State of Rajasthan v. Kalki and Raju v. State of T.N., holding that relationship is not equivalent to interest

Principle from State of U.P. v. Naresh that their testimony is accorded special status as their presence is "stamped"

The "Common Object" doctrine under Section 149 was applied using Lalji v. State of U.P., which establishes that specific overt acts by every member are unnecessary once the assembly is proven unlawful

The plea of alibi was governed by Section 11 of the Evidence Act and the standard of "absolute certainty" set in Vijay Pal v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

The Court found the deaths homicidal based on medical evidence confirming gunshot tracks in Badal and fatal cranial fractures in Ajay

It rejected the challenge to the witnesses' credibility, noting that Vinod (PW1) and Shiv Kumar (PW3) were injured, which "stamps" their presence at the scene

Despite a 25-day delay in recording some statements, the Court observed the defense failed to question the Investigating Officer on this delay, thereby waiving the objection

The "Unlawful Assembly" was established by the fact that the accused were waiting at the spot armed with deadly weapons on account of pre-existing enmity regarding a compromise

Each appellant was held vicariously liable under Section 149 because they stayed in the assembly during the assault

The plea of alibi for Chappa was rejected as his witness (DW1) could not identify the signatures on the hospital record nor was he present at the hospital at the relevant time

The appeals were dismissed. The court upheld the conviction and life imprisonment sentences for appellants Aakash, Chappa @ Harkishan, Chhuttan, Kadori @ Chunnilal, and Sunny. The four appellants on bail were ordered to surrender within one month, while Sunny’s ongoing incarceration was continued