Conviction Based on Sole Eye-Witness and Medical Corroboration; Court Rejects Claims of Ante-Timed FIR
Allahabad, January 20, 2026 - In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court has upheld the life imprisonment sentence awarded to Islam, the appellant, by the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Saharanpur, for the murder of Mehmoodan in 1987. The Division Bench, comprising Justices Salil Kumar Rai and Vinai Kumar Dwivedi, dismissed the appeal filed by Islam challenging his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
The court found the sole testimony of an eye-witness, Shareef Ahmad (PW-1), to be credible and corroborated by medical evidence and recovery of the weapon used in the crime. The judgment emphasized that minor discrepancies in witness testimony do not render it untrustworthy when corroborated by other evidence, and the absence of motive is not material where there is direct evidence of the crime.
The prosecution's case was that Islam, along with co-accused Naseem and Altaf, attacked Mehmoodan due to a property dispute. The incident occurred on November 2, 1987, when Mehmoodan was assaulted with an axe, leading to her death. The appellant's counsel argued that the FIR was ante-timed and highlighted discrepancies in witness testimonies. However, the court rejected these contentions, stating that the delay in FIR dispatch was explained and did not affect its credibility.
The court relied on the Supreme Court's principles for appreciating ocular evidence, asserting that the credibility of a witness depends on the overall consistency and corroboration of their testimony. It dismissed the argument that the witness testimony was unreliable due to contradictions with the FIR, noting that minor variations do not invalidate the core evidence.
The judgment also addressed the argument of the appellant's counsel regarding the acquittal of co-accused, stating that the principle of "Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus" is not applicable in India. The credible evidence against Islam was sufficient to sustain his conviction independently of the acquittals.
The court affirmed the trial court's findings, observing that the demeanor of the witness was crucial in assessing credibility. It instructed Islam, currently out on bail, to surrender by February 25, 2026, to serve his sentence, failing which legal steps would be taken to ensure compliance.
Bottom Line:
Conviction under Section 302 IPC - Sole testimony of an eye-witness, corroborated by medical evidence, held sufficient to uphold the conviction. Minor discrepancies in witness testimony do not render it untrustworthy. Motive is not essential when there is direct evidence of the crime.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 302, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Section 3, Criminal Procedure Code Section 161, Criminal Procedure Code Section 313
Islam v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2841411
