Unreliable sole eyewitness testimony and recovery from open public places cannot sustain a murder conviction.

The prosecution alleged that on 31-08-2000, the four accused, motivated by enmity regarding a love affair between the deceased (Shailesh) and the sister of Accused No. 1, assaulted the deceased with sharp weapons near Sai Baba Temple, Bhavnagar

The deceased suffered multiple injuries and died at the hospital

The trial court (Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar) acquitted all accused on 17-08-2001, citing the unreliability of the sole eye-witness, lack of independent witnesses in a crowded area, and defective recovery of weapons

The State and the victim's father appealed and moved for revision, respectively, against this acquittal

1. Whether the testimony of the sole eye-witness, Bharat Dabhi, was sufficiently reliable and corroborated to sustain a conviction for murder under Section 302/34 of the IPC

2. Whether the recovery of weapons from an open public place satisfied the requirements of Section 27 of the Evidence Act

3. Whether the High Court should interfere with an order of acquittal where the trial court’s view is a possible and reasonable conclusion

The court applied Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code regarding murder and common intention

It strictly interpreted Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, noting that discovery must be from a place of exclusive possession, not an open public spot

The court relied on the "double presumption of innocence" principle in appeals against acquittal as established in *Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka* and *H.D. Sundara v. State of Karnataka*, holding that if two views are possible, the one in favor of the accused must prevail

It further cited *State of Rajasthan v. Hanuman* (2025) regarding the insufficiency of mere blood-stained weapon recovery without a complete circumstantial chain

The Court found the conduct of the sole eye-witness, Bharat Dabhi, highly unnatural; despite being a close friend, he neither intervened, raised an alarm, nor rendered aid to the bleeding deceased

His explanation for fleeing was contradicted by police testimony denying any lathi-charge at the scene

Furthermore, the prosecution failed to examine any independent witnesses despite the incident occurring at a crowded temple junction on a busy Thursday evening

The recovery of weapons was deemed legally flawed because it was a "joint recovery" from an open babool tree area accessible to the public, thus failing the "exclusive knowledge" test under Section 27 of the Evidence Act

Since the chain of circumstantial evidence was broken and the primary ocular account was discredited, the Court determined that the trial court’s decision to grant the benefit of doubt was a reasonable and sustainable view

The High Court dismissed both the Criminal Appeal and the Revision Application, confirming the judgment of acquittal dated 17-08-2001

The Court emphasized that in the absence of perverse findings, the appellate court must not overturn an acquittal merely because a different view is possible