In a recent legal standoff, the highest court of the land maintained a murder conviction, affirming the primacy of eyewitness accounts over medical expert opinions. The case, which involved the tragic demise of Shivanna and grievous injuries to his family members, saw the conviction of three individuals under Sections 302 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code.
The crux of the matter hinged on the discrepancy between the ocular evidence provided by eyewitnesses and the expert testimony of a medical professional. While the doctor’s report suggested the possibility of alternative weapons being used, the eyewitnesses steadfastly maintained that a chopper was the sole instrument employed in the crime.
Dismissing the appeal brought forth by the accused, the Supreme Court emphasized the credibility of the eyewitnesses, despite their familial ties to the deceased. Their firsthand accounts, coupled with the absence of other witnesses, formed the cornerstone of the prosecution’s case.
The court underscored the principle that the testimony of interested witnesses cannot be summarily dismissed, particularly in cases where alternative evidence is lacking. In this instance, the ocular evidence provided by the eyewitnesses trumped the speculative nature of the medical expert’s opinion.
Furthermore, the court clarified that Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code extends liability to all members of an unlawful assembly if an offence is committed in pursuit of their collective objective. Thus, even if only a subset of the assembly perpetrates the crime, all members are held accountable.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction, asserting that the lower courts had not erred in their findings. This verdict serves as a testament to the enduring importance of eyewitness testimony in the dispensation of justice.
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab 
