The Court also noted that it was upon the appellant to demonstrate that the incongruities and consistency in the statements of the several eye witnesses shook the roots of their credibility.
“In the present case, there is evidence to the effect that the appellant was part of an unlawful assembly which gathered at the place of occurrence. The victim had in mind bringing a thriving trade in liquor to be brought to a grinding halt. There was, thus, definite motive for the accused persons including the appellant to throttle the voice of the victim. In such a scenario, the appellant was required to point out serious loopholes in the prosecution story for discrediting the witnesses. Unfortunately, our faith in the credibility and reliability of the witnesses is unshaken. Although, there are a few inconsistencies in the testimonies of the witnesses but the same are minor and not substantial, as argued, so as to erode the credibility of such witnesses,” the Court said.
Medical evidence also proved that the victim had died due to injuries sustained due to attack with dagger.
“The appellant’s submission that only one of the eight injuries sustained by the victim is grievous and the rest are simple and hence there is no intention to cause death, cannot be accepted after examining the facts of the case. In Stalin v. State , this Court held that death caused by a single stab wound can also be considered murder if the requirements of section 300, IPC are fulfilled,” the apex court said.
Hence, the Court was of the view that the prosecution has proven its case against appellant beyond reasonable doubt.
Therefore, it dismissed the appeal.
Source: Barandbench
