"Relationship No Factor To Affect Credibility Of A Witness" : Allahabad High Court Upholds Conviction U/S 304 (II) IPC In A 1981 Case

The Allahabad High Court last week upheld the conviction of a man under Section 304 of the IPC who was sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 304 (II) of the IPC for committing culpable homicide not amounting to murder in the year 1981.

Stressing that relationship is not a factor to affect credibility of a witnes, the bench of Justice Vikram D. Chauhan observed that mere statement that being relatives of the deceased they are likely to falsely implicate the accused cannot be a ground to discard the evidence which is otherwise cogent and credible. 

"Merely because the witnesses are family members their evidence cannot per se be discarded. When there is allegation of interestedness, the same has to be established...It is more often than not that a relation would not conceal actual culprit and make allegations against an innocent person. Foundation has to be laid if plea of false implication is made. There is no bar in law on examining family members as witness. Evidence of a related witness can be relied upon provided it is trustworthy," the Court further remarked.

The case in brief

In the instant case, Accused Kanta was held guilty by the Special and Additional Sessions Judge, Ghazipur of assaulting the deceased (Laxmi Shankar) with a Faruhi. Essentially, there was an altercation between the accused and the complainant and when the accused took 'Faruhi' in his hand to assault the complainant, the deceased came in between them to save the complainant and as such 'Faruhi' hit the deceased on his head.

The deceased on being hit on the head fell down and was taken to the Doctor who gave him first aid and thereafter he was talking normally and as such the complainant thought that he was out of danger and did not take him to hospital, however, at about 11:00 p.m. Laxmi Shankar died on account of injury. 

Before the Court, it was argued by the appellant that there was no independent witness of the alleged occurrence and since the Prosecution Witness was the relative of the deceased, htherefore, there being no independent witness of the alleged occurrence, the prosecution story is not reliable and the evidence related witness is not trustworthy and is liable to be rejected.

Court's observations

At the outset, the Court observed that a witness is normally to be considered independent unless he or she springs from sources which are likely to be tainted and that usually means unless the witness has cause, such as enmity against the accused, to wish to implicate him falsely.

"Ordinarily a close relative would be the last to screen the real culprit and falsely implicate an innocent person. It is often the case that the offence is witnessed by a close relative of the victim, whose presence on the scene of the offence would be natural. The evidence of such a witness cannot automatically be discarded by labelling the witness as interested," the Court further remarked as it rejected the plea of the Appellant that there is no independent witness to support the prosecution case.

The Court also discarded the plea of the appellant that there had been an unexplained delay in the lodging of the FIR and that the injury could have been caused by a Gandasa and not a Faruhi.

With this, having found no illegality, infirmity and perversity in the impugned judgement passed by the trial court convicting and sentencing the Appellant for the offence, the High Court upheld the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court and rejected appeal of the accused.

Case title - Kanta v. State of U.P. [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 549 of 1983]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 399

Click Here To Read/Download Order