Kailas Namdeo Patil and ors. v. State of Maharashtra - (Supreme Court) (16 Jun 2016)

Inconsistent witness testimony fails to deter SC from relying on it

Criminal

The Supreme Court overlooked discrepancies in the testimony of a prosecution witness, and upheld the conviction on its basis, determining the inconsistencies to be unrelated to the recounting of the assault.

It was alleged that Appellant and others had attacked one, Jagan, with knives and snatched a gold chain worn by him. Jagan’s brother, principal prosecution witness, stated that he was present when the event occurred.

From other accounts adduced by the defence it came to light that events unfolded spontaneously; moreover, three others in the vicinity at the time of incident did not support prosecution witness’ claims. As such, Appellant raised the plea that prosecution failed to show the motive for him to have committed the crime.

The court however accepted prosecution’s version of events, noting that the nature of discrepancy in the testimony of their witness was not sufficient to discard it with regards to the actual assault on the deceased. Appellant’s conviction was upheld, but one other accused was acquitted.

Tags : ASSAULT PROSECUTION WITNESS DISCREPANCY