In the case of Gajraj Singh vs. State of India, doubts about witness credibility led to the acquittal of the accused by the Supreme Court. The testimonies of witnesses Lakhan Singh (PW-10) and Ram Singh (PW-11) were deemed untrustworthy, raising concerns about the validity of the conviction. Additionally, conflicting statements from Somati (PW-6) and Raghubir (PW-7) further added to the uncertainty surrounding the case. The decision to acquit the accused highlights the importance of reliable witness testimony in legal proceedings.
Facts
- Two witnesses saw the accused beating Gajraj Singh.
- The witnesses were threatened by the accused when they asked why Gajraj Singh was being beaten.
- The witnesses ran away to save their lives.
- They later reached village Kotra and went to the police station to lodge the First Information Report (FIR).
- During investigation, it was revealed that Somati and Raghubir were the last ones seen with Gajraj Singh.
Also Read: Enforcement of Foreign Award: Case of Oscar Investments Limited and RHC Holding Private Limited
Arguments
- Contention raised regarding the untrustworthiness of testimonies of Lakhan Singh (PW-10) and Ram Singh (PW-11).
- Claim that the testimonies along with attending circumstances do not support reliance on these witnesses and hence the conviction should be set aside.
- Assertion that the testimonies of Somati (PW-6) and Raghubir (PW-7) are contradictory and unreliable, suggesting they may go against Imrat Singh but not the other accused.
Also Read: Case of Eligibility for Disability Pension: Air Force Officer’s Retirement
Analysis
- Lakhan Singh (PW-10) and Ram Singh (PW-11) witnessed the accused beating Gajraj Singh with lathis at Brar Khora.
- Contradictions in the statements of witnesses create doubt in the prosecution’s story.
- Witnesses mention different versions of who informed the village about Gajraj Singh’s death.
- The site plan preparation indicates bias in the investigation.
- Significant contradictions between the statements of key witnesses raise questions about their credibility.
- Witnesses provide conflicting accounts of events post the incident.
- Several crucial witnesses, including the Deputy Superintendent of Police, have not been examined.
- Improvements and discrepancies in witness statements over time suggest potential fabrication.
- Failure of witnesses to take action to save Gajraj Singh after witnessing the incident.
- Absence of crucial witnesses from Bharon Kalan to corroborate the visit claimed by the main witnesses.
- Contradictions in the statements of key witnesses raised doubts about their reliability.
- Lack of consideration of contradictions by the High Court and Trial Court.
- Benefit of doubt to be given to the accused due to doubts cast on witness testimony.
- Failure to consider attending circumstances by the lower courts.
- Highlighted specific discrepancies in witness statements affecting their credibility.
Also Read: Judgment by Supreme Court On Man Singh vs. State of India
Decision
- The conviction of both the Courts below is set aside.
- The accused are acquitted as a result of the appeal.
- The accused are currently on bail and their bail bonds are discharged.
Case Title: IMRAT SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000480-000480 / 2009
