Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Sudden Quarrel over Mound of Earth — Not Murder but Culpable Homicide: Allahabad High Court Eligibility Flows from Birth, Not a Certificate Date: Delhi High Court Strikes Down Rule Fixing Arbitrary Cut-Off for OBC-NCL Certificates in CAPF (AC) Recruitment Bar Under Order II Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Invoked Where Specific Performance Was Legally Premature Due To Statutory Impediments: P&H High Court Once a Court Declares a Department an Industry Under Section 2(j), State Cannot Raise the Same Objection Again: Gujarat High Court Slams Repetitive Litigation by Irrigation Department “How Could Cheques Issued in 2020 Be Mentioned in a 2019 Contract?”: Delhi High Court Grants Injunction in Forged MOA Case, Slams Prima Facie Fabrication Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC Sole Testimony of Prosecutrix, If Credible, Is Enough to Convict: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Cheque Issued as Security Still Attracts Section 138 NI Act If Liability Exists on Date of Presentation: Himachal Pradesh High Court No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Minor Discrepancies in Witness Statements Do Not Discredit Their Reliability," Rules Punjab and Haryana High Court in Murder Case

05 February 2025 11:17 AM

By: sayum


The court upholds life imprisonment for murder convicts, emphasizing the importance of consistent eyewitness testimony. On May 24, 2024, the Punjab and Haryana High Court upheld the life imprisonment sentences of the accused in a high-profile murder case. The judgment, delivered by a bench underscores the paramount importance of consistent eyewitness testimonies, even when facing contradictory arguments presented by the defense. This decision reaffirms the lower court's findings and sets a significant precedent in handling cases involving contradictory witness statements.

Consistency of Eyewitness Testimony: The court emphasized the critical role of consistent eyewitness testimonies in securing a conviction. "In the present case, the eyewitness accounts have remained unwavering and coherent throughout the trial, providing a solid foundation for the prosecution's case," the bench noted. Despite attempts by the defense to highlight inconsistencies, the court found the witnesses' accounts reliable and credible.

Addressing Contradictions by the Defense: The defense argued that contradictions in the testimonies undermined the prosecution's case. However, the court observed, "Minor discrepancies in witness statements are natural and do not necessarily discredit the overall reliability of their testimony." The judgment pointed out that the core elements of the witnesses' accounts were consistent, which significantly contributed to the affirmation of the conviction.

The judgment delved into the principles governing the evaluation of eyewitness testimony. It reiterated that a conviction can be sustained if the testimonies are found to be trustworthy and corroborated by other evidence. "The consistency observed in the key eyewitness testimonies, coupled with the corroborative material evidence, leaves no room for doubt about the guilt of the accused," the court stated.

Justice remarked, "The coherence in the eyewitness testimonies, despite the defense's attempts to highlight contradictions, underscores the strength of the prosecution's case. Such consistency is crucial in ensuring justice is served."

The Punjab and Haryana High Court's ruling in this case underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding justice through the reliability of consistent witness testimonies. By affirming the lower court's decision, the judgment sends a strong message about the weight given to coherent eyewitness accounts. This landmark decision is expected to have a significant impact on future cases, reinforcing the legal framework for evaluating witness testimonies in criminal trials.

Date of Decision: May 24, 2024

 

Latest Legal News