High Court Test 2
10 min40 WPM required541 words
Click on the passage and start typing to begin.
The accused was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case arising out of a first information report registered at the Police Station under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging that the accused along with his co-accused in furtherance of their common intention and without any premeditation had caused the death of the deceased during a dispute that arose over an outstanding financial transaction. The trial court, after a full trial in which seventeen prosecution witnesses were examined, ten documents were exhibited on behalf of the prosecution, and the accused were afforded an opportunity to cross-examine prosecution witnesses and lead their own evidence, convicted the principal accused and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with a fine of fifteen thousand rupees with a default sentence of six months simple imprisonment in case of non-payment of fine. The present appeal preferred by the convicted accused challenges both the conviction and the sentence on multiple grounds including that the identification of the accused by the prosecution witnesses was unreliable given the poor lighting conditions at the scene and the witnesses' prior acquaintance with the accused suggesting motivated testimony, that the medical evidence regarding the nature and cause of the injuries was not conclusively corroborated by the oral evidence of the eyewitnesses, and that the learned trial court failed to properly consider the defence evidence including the plea of alibi supported by documentary material. This Court has undertaken a thorough and independent examination of the entire record of the trial including the depositions of all witnesses, the cross-examination material, the exhibits, the post-mortem examination report of the medical officer who conducted the autopsy, and the forensic science laboratory report on the blood staining and weapon examination. The three eyewitnesses who deposed to being present at the scene of the incident and to having witnessed the assault gave consistent accounts of the sequence of events in their examination-in-chief and maintained those accounts substantially intact in cross-examination despite sustained and skilled questioning by the defence counsel that focused on identifying contradictions and exaggerations. Minor discrepancies in peripheral details noticed in the cross-examination of these witnesses are such as are ordinarily expected in the testimony of honest witnesses deposing from memory about a frightening incident they witnessed some time in the past and do not in any way undermine the credibility of the core account of the incident. The post-mortem examination report establishes that the deceased suffered injuries to the head and torso that were consistent with the nature of the assault described by the prosecution witnesses and that these injuries were the direct and proximate cause of death. The findings of fact recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge are based on a proper appreciation of the evidence and are not perverse, arbitrary, or based on irrelevant considerations. The conviction is accordingly confirmed. On the question of sentence, however, taking into consideration the absence of prior criminal antecedents of the accused, his family circumstances as disclosed on record, and the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court modifies the sentence of imprisonment to five years rigorous imprisonment while maintaining the fine. The appeal is partly allowed to this extent only.