Read Judgment: Suresh Yadav @ Guddu V. The State of Chhattisgarh
New Delhi, February 28, 2022: The Supreme Court has opined that when the evidence of the eye-witness to the incident, remains unimpeachable and has been believed by the two Courts, then same evidence cannot be discarded only for the reason that he allegedly did not raise any alarm or did not try to intervene when the deceased was being ferociously assaulted and stabbed.
A Division Bench of Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Vikram Nath observed that no interference is warranted essentially for re-appreciation of evidence or for taking a different view of the evidence than the one taken by the Trial Court and the High Court, in absence of any manifest illegality or without pointing out any misreading of the evidence or any error of law or procedure.
Going by the background of the case, the appellant had been convicted of offences u/s 302 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act. The accusations against the appellant was that he was having a love affair with the deceased but got enraged when he saw the deceased talking to another boy and caused multiple injuries to the deceased by a pointed knife, leading to her death.
The Trial Court therefore, awarded varying punishments, including that of life imprisonment for the offence u/s 302 IPC. On appeal, the High Court affirmed the conviction of the appellant.
After considering the submissions, the Top Court observed that excessive number of injuries did not ipso facto lead to an inference about involvement of more than one person.Rather the nature of injuries and similarity of their size/dimension would only lead to the inference that she (deceased – victim) was mercilessly and repeatedly stabbed by the same weapon and by the same person, added the Court.
Hence, the Apex Court dismissed the appeal.
However, Apex Court clarified that dismissal of this appeal shall not be of any adverse effect on such exercise of power of remission by the Government of Chhattisgarh.