Supreme Court: Sterling Quality of Eyewitness Testimony Sufficient to Uphold Murder Conviction, Even if Other Eyewitnesses Are Not Examined

Post By 24law
March 8, 2025

Pranav B Prem

The Supreme Court has upheld the conviction of a police constable and others in a murder case, rejecting the accused's alibi plea and holding that the evidence of three eyewitnesses was of sterling quality. The Court ruled that failure to examine other alleged eyewitnesses would not be fatal to the prosecution's case.

Case Background

The appeals were filed by Tanaji Shamrao Kale (Accused No. 9), Ratu (Accused No. 1), Satu (Accused No. 2), and Maruti (Accused No. 5), challenging their conviction under Sections 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC. The Trial Court had sentenced them to life imprisonment, which was affirmed by the High Court. The incident took place on July 18, 2001, when a long-standing land and water dispute escalated into a violent altercation. According to the prosecution, the accused attacked the deceased, Murlidhar, with swords. The crime was witnessed by three key eyewitnesses—PW-1, PW-2, and PW-5. The accused Tanaji Shamrao Kale, a police constable, was specifically identified as having taken a sword from Accused No. 1, Ratu, and delivered multiple blows to the deceased's right knee.

Key Judicial Findings

1. Evidence of Three Eyewitnesses Considered Sufficient

The Supreme Court found no material contradictions or omissions in the testimonies of PW-1, PW-2, and PW-5. The Court observed: "It is true that there may be other eye witnesses who were not examined. But PW-2 is not a witness who was related in any manner to the deceased. He had no enmity against the accused. As the evidence of the three eye witnesses is of sterling quality, the failure to examine the other alleged eye witnesses will not be fatal for the prosecution case."

2. Rejection of Alibi Plea of Accused No. 9 (Tanaji Shamrao Kale)

Accused No. 9, Tanaji Shamrao Kale, a police constable, argued that he was on official duty with the crime branch on July 18-19, 2001, and was not present at the crime scene. However, the Supreme Court noted: "PW-10, Vasant Zunjare, P.I., stated that from 18th July to 19th July 2001, some important duty was assigned to the accused no.9 Tanaji. The witness admitted that accused Tanaji was not in the police station on those two days. The accused no.9 has not adduced evidence to show that he was elsewhere when the incident occurred. Therefore, the accused no.9 Tanaji's alibi plea cannot be accepted." The Court found that no evidence was produced to substantiate his absence, leading to the rejection of his alibi.

3. Role of Each Accused in the Crime

The Supreme Court relied on the testimonies of PW-1 and PW-2, who explicitly identified the accused. The prosecution established that:

The accused were seen assaulting the deceased with swords.

Accused No. 9, Tanaji, actively participated in the attack.

Accused No. 4 was acquitted by the Trial Court due to a successful alibi defense, but this did not benefit the other accused.

4. Dismissal of Appeals and Directions for Surrender

After considering the evidence, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals and issued the following directions: "The appeals are dismissed. We direct the accused no. 9-Tanaji Shamrao Kale, to surrender within one month from today to undergo the remaining sentence. If accused nos.1, 2, and 5, who have challenged the impugned judgment, have already undergone the sentence and have been released, the question of the said accused being taken to custody will not arise. However, if they have not been released after undergoing the sentence, they must undergo the remaining sentence."