Court affirms trial court's decision citing contradictions in eyewitness testimonies, lack of independent witnesses, and non-recovery of weapon.
In a significant judgment, the Jammu and Kashmir High Court upheld the acquittal of Balwinder Kumar alias Bittu in a murder case, affirming the trial court's decision to grant him the benefit of doubt. The acquittal, originally pronounced by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kathua, was based on several critical lapses in the prosecution's case.
The case, dating back to an incident on July 19, 2002, involved the alleged murder of Nasib Chand, who was reportedly stabbed by Balwinder Kumar following a longstanding enmity. Despite the serious nature of the accusations, the trial court found numerous deficiencies in the prosecution's narrative, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
The High Court, comprising Justices Mrs. Sindhu Sharma and Shahzad Azeem, noted multiple contradictions in the testimonies of key eyewitnesses, including the family members of the deceased. These inconsistencies pertained to their whereabouts at the time of the crime and the sequence of events that unfolded thereafter.
Moreover, the court highlighted the absence of independent witnesses despite claims of several villagers being present at the scene. The lone independent witness, Kiran Jyoti, was declared hostile, further weakening the prosecution's case.
The judgment also pointed out the prosecution's failure to explain injuries sustained by Balwinder Kumar, suggesting possible suppression of the true genesis of the crime. Additionally, the alleged recovery of the murder weapon was not substantiated, as crucial witnesses either turned hostile or were not examined.
A significant aspect of the judgment was the observation regarding the FIR, which appeared to be ante-dated, casting doubts on the spontaneity and credibility of the initial report. This discrepancy, coupled with the selective prosecution of Balwinder Kumar while excluding his brothers, suggested potential manipulation.
The High Court reiterated the cardinal principle of criminal law, stating that if two reasonable views are possible, one leading to guilt and the other to innocence, the court must adopt the view favoring the accused. This principle, combined with the noted improbabilities in the prosecution's story, justified the trial court's decision to acquit the accused.
In conclusion, the appeal against the acquittal was dismissed, with the High Court finding no illegality or factual error in the trial court's judgment. The case highlights critical aspects of evidence evaluation and the importance of robust prosecution in securing convictions in criminal cases.
Bottom line:-
Acquittal in murder case - Contradictions in eyewitness accounts, absence of independent witnesses, unexplained injuries on the accused, non-recovery of weapon, and alleged ante-dated FIR collectively cast doubt on the prosecution case.
Statutory provision(s): Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 378, Evidence Act, 1872 Section 114
State of J&K v. Balwinder Kumar Alias Bittu, (Jammu And Kashmir)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2911450
