In a recent judgment passed by the Division Bench of Lisa Gill, J. and Parmod Goyal, J. while dismissing a criminal appeal against judgment of conviction passed by the Sessions Court under section 302 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, the Hon’ble Bench categorically observed that witnesses related to the victim are competent witnesses and can be relied upon by Court if their testimony is found to be consistent, trustworthy and reliable. It noted that the evidence of relatives had to be appreciated keeping in view that the said witnesses may be the most natural witness when more often public witnesses are not willing to come forward to depose in criminal cases.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The deceased, complainant and the appellant were involved in a land feud over a Pakka Khal (water canal) which was in the past few days, demarcated by the Halqa Patwari revealing that the water passage actually fell within the complainant’s land, leading to friction between the parties. On the day of occurence, when the deceased was ploughing his land on his tractor, he was shot twice with a 12-bore gun by the appellant and co-accused after which the co-accused feld the scene and the deceased was declared as brought dead when he was taken to the hospital by the Complainant
QUESTION OF LAW INVOLVED
- Whether the testimonies of related eye-witnesses PW-2 and PW-3 could be relied upon without independent corroboration?
- Whether the motive was sufficiently established considering the agricultural land dispute?
- Whether medical evidence i.e. the presence of rigor mortis contradicted the time of occurrence, making the prosecution’s version improbable?
- Whether the manner of firing from ground level to the tractor height made the prosecution’s case improbable?
JUDGMENTS RELIED UPON
- Mst. Dalbir Kaur and Others v. State of Punjab1: A close relative who is a very natural witness cannot be regarded as interested witness. The term interested postulates that the person concerned must have some direct interest in seeing that the accused person is somehow or the other convicted either because he had some animus with the accused or for some other reason.
- Dilip Singh and Others v. The State of Punjab2: A witness is normally to be considered independent unless he or she springs from sources which are likely to be tainted and that usually means unless the witness has cause, such as enmity against the accused, to wish to implicate him falsely.
- Bihari Mahto @ Kubra v. State of Bihar3: The possibility of rigor mortis setting and passing off within a shorter period cannot be ruled out.
- Mangu Khan and Others v. State of Rajasthan4: The presence of rigor mortis all over the body by itself cannot warrant the argument that the death must have occurred during the previous night. Acceptable ocular evidence cannot be dislodged on such hypothetical bases for which no proper grounds were laid.
OBITER DICTUM
Rigor mortis is the temporary stiffening of muscles after death, caused by the lack of Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP) which prevents muscle fibers from relaxing after they contract. After death, the body can no longer produce ATP, the molecule that provides energy for muscle relaxation. Without ATP, the myosin heads remain attached to actin filaments, preventing the muscles from relaxing and causing them to stiffen. The process is also accompanied by the release of calcium ions and the buildup of lactic acid in the muscle cells, which contributes to the stiffening and decreased ‘pH’ levels. This process usually begins a few hours after death, becomes most pronounced with passage of time, and eventually dissipates as decomposition begins. The stiffness is a result of the inability to break the actin-myosin cross-bridges in the muscle fibers, leading to a rigid state.
Rigor mortis starts in smaller muscles, like those in face and hands and progresses to the larger muscles and the entire body becomes stiff. The degree to which rigor mortis has set in is a key factor used by medical examiners to estimate the time of death. The position is which rigor mortis is found can indicate the position of the body at the time of death, unless the body was moved after the process began.
However, there is no particular time line for rigor mortis to set in and complete and it depends upon various variables such as temperature, physical exertion before death, age and muscle mass, cause of death and fat content.
RATIO DECIDENDI
The Court, while dismissing the plea if the appellant regards questionable reliability to the testimony of related witnesses, and the improbability of the incident having occurred at 12:00PM when post mortem, conducted after about 5 hours of the death showed rigor mortis to have been completed held that:
- Witnesses related to the victim are competent witnesses and can be relied upon by Court if their testimony is found to be consistent, trustworthy and reliable.
- Evidence of such witness needs to be appreciated depending upon facts and circumstances of each case. Court as a caution may, seek corroboration from other material facts, is needed. A relative is not an interested witness unless it is shown that he wants to get conviction of accused by all means, just or unjust.
- Minor discrepancies in the testimonies of witnesses are not uncommon and should not automatically lead to their rejection unless they strike at the root of the prosecution’s case. Therefore, minor discrepancies in the eye-witness account do not detract from the core narrative implicating the accused.
- There is no absolute rule that in the absence of independent witnesses, evidence of related witness is liable to be ignored. Effect of non-examination of independent witness is dependent on the facts and circumstances of the case. Non-examination of independent witness when none was present cannot be taken against case of prosecution. When independent witness is not available, the other witnesses whose presence is natural cannot be disregarded.
- Merely because the rigor mortis was complete at the time of examination of dead body would not lead to conclusion that the occurrence had not taken place at the time suggested by PW-2 and PW-3.
- Medical opinion is not conclusive/ definite regarding the nature to make case of prosecution improbable as to take precedence over ocular account. If evidence of eye-witness is reliable and trustworthy, the same cannot be ignored merely on the basis of medical opinion unless it is shown that evidence of witness is improbable in light of conclusive medical opinion.
The judgment thus, reaffirms the long-standing principle of criminal law that trustworthy ocular testimony, when natural, consistent and supported by surrounding circumstances, cannot be dislodged by speculative or inconclusive medical opinions. Equally, the Hon’ble Bench reiterated that related witnesses are not to be discarded merely due to relationship, their testimony often carries greater probative value when they are the most natural witnesses present at the scene. The defence’s reliance on medical indicators of time of death was held insufficient to override clear and cogent eyewitness evidence, especially in light of the acknowledged variability of rigor mortis.
The appeal was dismissed as wholly without merit, underscoring the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring that scientific uncertainties do not eclipse credible human testimony and that deliberate acts of violence grounded in motive and supported by evidence receive the full force of law.