Hostile witnesses' testimonies can still be utilized for corroboration if they align with other evidence.

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in High-Profile Murder Case. High Court's Reversal of Acquittal Affirmed; Key Witnesses and Evidence Lead to Life Imprisonment for Accused

In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the conviction of five individuals involved in a high-profile murder case, affirming the decision of the Madras High Court which reversed the trial court's acquittal. The case, concerning the brutal murder of a school teacher, Patchaiperumal, took a decisive turn with the Supreme Court's judgment, which meticulously analyzed witness testimonies and circumstantial evidence.

The appellants, Murugesan, Patchaiperumal @ Patchikutti, Palavesaraj @ Palavesamuthu, Kulasekarapandian, and Biledy Ganesan @ Selvaganesan, were sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 read with Sections 34, 148, and 341 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for murder with common intention. The case hinged on the eye-witness accounts of the victim's brother-in-law and brother, who provided detailed testimonies despite facing threats during the attack. The High Court had previously relied on these accounts, supported by medical and circumstantial evidence, to overturn the trial court's acquittal.

The Supreme Court's judgment, delivered by Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, emphasized the credibility of the eye-witnesses, whose testimonies were corroborated by medical evidence and the recovery of weapons. The court dismissed the defense's arguments regarding alleged contradictions and the reliability of hostile witnesses, asserting that minor discrepancies do not invalidate the core prosecution narrative.

A pivotal aspect of the case was the recovery of nine sickles and a ninja chain, corroborated by Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, and the use of a sniffer dog, which traced the crime scene to one of the accused's residences. Despite some witnesses turning hostile, the Supreme Court maintained that their testimonies still held value when supported by other evidence.

The judgment also addressed concerns about the delay in forwarding the FIR to the magistrate, which the court deemed satisfactorily explained, ruling out any manipulation. The Supreme Court underscored the importance of ensuring that guilty individuals are held accountable while upholding the principles of justice.

The ruling marks a closure to a case characterized by complex familial animosities and alleged conspiracies, reinforcing the judiciary's role in upholding the rule of law through careful evaluation of evidence and witness credibility.

Bottom Line:

Conviction under Section 302 IPC for murder with common intention based on eye-witness testimony, corroborating medical evidence, and circumstantial evidence upheld by the Supreme Court. Hostile witnesses' testimonies can still be utilized for corroboration if they align with other evidence.

Statutory provision(s): Section 302 IPC, Section 34 IPC, Section 27 Evidence Act, Section 374(2) CrPC

Patchaiperumal @ Patchikutti v. State Rep. By Inspector Of Police, (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2824257