Holding

The discrepancy in FIR timing does not invalidate the prosecution, motive is not essential when direct evidence exists, and the eyewitness and forensic evidence are reliable, so the conviction stands.

Summary

Santosh was convicted for murdering Janardhan Dalvi and attempting to murder PW1 (Sandhu) by stabbing with a sharp-edged weapon. The trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment under IPC sections 302 and 307, a decision affirmed by the High Court. On appeal, the accused challenged the credibility of the eyewitness PW1, the alleged motive, a discrepancy in the time the FIR was lodged, and the seizure of the weapon. The Supreme Court held that the timing discrepancy was not fatal to the prosecution, that motive is not essential when the case is proved by direct evidence, and that the eyewitness, medical and forensic evidence were reliable. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the conviction.

Issues considered

Whether a discrepancy in the time of lodging the FIR defeats the prosecution case.
Whether the credibility of the eyewitness PW1 can be impeached on the basis of alleged prior false implication.
Whether the prosecution must establish a motive when the case is based on direct evidence.
Whether the identity of the accused is sufficiently proved.
Whether the seizure of the weapon and blood evidence is valid.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code, 1860s. 302, s. 307

Subjects

murderattempt to murdereyewitness credibilityFIR discrepancymotiveforensic evidenceIndian Penal Codecriminal appeal

Judgment

~ SANTOSH @ SANTUKRAO A
v.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

MAY9,2007

(S.B. SINHA AND MARKANDEY KA TJU, JJ.] B

> Penal Code, I fJ60; Ss. 302 and 307:
\

Assault and murder-Accused attacking deceased with a sharp edged
weapon causing his death and injuring PW I-Trial Court found him guilty c
ofoffences u/ss. 302 and 307 IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment
for life-Affirmed by High Court-On appeal, Held: Purported discrepancy
in respect of time of actual lodging of FIR is not such which would prove
to be f;tal to entire prosecution case particularly when ocular evidence is
corroborated by the medical evidence-When prosecution case is proved by D
direct evidence, motive takes a back seat-However, in the facts and
-c circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the motive has not been
... proved-Weapons of assault and other articles recovered at the instance of
the accused-Blood on the shirt recovered matched with the blood group of
PW I, the victim-Both the Courts below accepted the testimony of PW I as
a natural witness-Under the facts and circumstances, there exists no reason E
to differ with the findings of the Courts below.

Doctrines:

Doctrine of 'falsus in Uno, falsus in Omnibus'-App/icabi/ity of
F
_.,._ According to the prosecution, on the fateful day, when PW 1 and the
deceased were _going to attend a weekly bazaar, accused-appellant came from
the opposite direction and allegedly assaulted the deceased. While PW 1 made
an attempt to prevent him from attacking, he was also attacked by the accused
with a sharp edged weapon, as a result whereof he suffered an injury. The
deceased was chased and assaulted again by the accused, the victim died on G
the spot. Trial Court found that accused guilty of committing offences u/s.
302 and 307 IPC and sentenced him accordingly. Aggrieved, the accused filed
·-<to. an appeal with was dismissed by the High Court. Hence the present appeal.

199 H
200 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] 6 S.C.R.

A Accused-appellant contended that credibility of PW 1 as an eye-witness ~
is in question as he had made an attempt to implicate on 'R' falsely; that the -..
alleged motive for commission of the offence, namely, giving ofa slap to the
accused by the deceased on an earlier occasion having not been proved, the
impugned judgment cannot be sustained; that there exists a discrepancy in
B regard to the time factor with regard to the holding of the First Information
Report, as although according to PW 1, it was lodged at 9.00 p.m., the
Investigating Officer, PW 7 stated that he had recorded the same at 11.45
p.m., and that seizure of the articles purported to be at the instance of the
appellant had not been proved.

C Dismissing the appeal, the Court

HELD: 1.1. There exists a discrepancy in regard to the time of lodging
of the First Information Report. It is, however, not in dispute that PW 1 was
admitted to hospital He was being treated when his statement was recorded
by PW 7, the Investigating Officer. According to the doctor treating him, the
D statement was recorded at about 11.00 p.m. The Investigating Officer, however,
stated that FIR was lodged at about 11.45 p.m. The possibility of the injured's
losing track or time by reason of sufferance of grave injuries cannot be ruled
out Similarly the time of the recording of the statement might have been made
at 11.00 p.m., but the First Information Report migt have been lodged at about
11.45 p.m. which would not mean that the recording of the statement of PW
E 1 had also started at that point of time. Purported discrepancy in respect of
the time or actual lodging of FIR is not such which would prove to be fatal to
the entire prosecution case particularly when the ocular evidence is
corroborated by the medical evidence.
[Para 9 and 10] (203-D, E, F, G]
F
1.2. It is now well known that in India, the doctrine falsus in uno, falsus
in omnibus has no application. So far as non-establishment of the motive on JI.
the part of the accused is concerned, suffice it to say that when t_he proseuction
case is proved by direct evidence, motive takes a back seat It is, however, not
correct to contended that motive has not been proved.
G [Para 101 (203-G, H; 204-A]

1.3. Before the Courts below, a contention had been raised in regard to
the identity of the accused. The Trial Court, in view of the fact that both parties
were resident of the same village, rightly negatived the said contention. Such .;--- ·
a contention has not been even seriously raised before this Court. Identity of
H the appellant, therefore, is not in dispute. Both the Courts be!ow have accepted
SANTOSH@SANTUKRAO v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [S.B. SINHA, J.] 20 l
the testimony of PW 1 as a natural witnesses. No reason is found to take a A
different view. [Para 11) [204-A, BJ

2. The details of the incident was also initimated immediately to PW 3
by PW 1. There is no reason as to why PW 3 would sell tell a lie. Besides,
the weapon of assault and other articles were recovered at the instance of
accused. It contained human blood. The shrit of the accused was also recovered. B
It was also stained with blood. Group of the blood found on the said weapon as
also of the accused being Group "B" matched with the blood group of PW 1.
;:_ Thus, there is no reason to differ with the findings of the Courts below.
[Para 13) (204-C, D, E)

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 704 of C
2007.

From the Final Judgment and Order dated 30.06.2004 of the High Court
of Judicature of Bombay Bench at Aurangabad in Criminal Appeal No. IOI of
2001.
D
K. Rajeev for the Appellant.

Sushil Karanjkar and Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure for the Respondent.

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
E
S.B. SINHA, J. I. Leave granted.

2. Appellant is before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment
of the High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Aurangabad Bench at Aurangabad
dated 30.6.2004 passed in Criminal Appeal No. IOI of 2001 whereby and F
whereunder the appeal preferred by the appellant herein from a judgment of
conviction and sentence dated 3.2.2001 passed by the Second Additional
Sessions Judge, Jalana finding the appellant guilty of commission of an
offence under Section 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing
him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- and to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a. fine of G
Rs. 5,000/- respectively, was affirmed.

3. The prosecution case is as under :-

t A First Information Report lodged by Sandhu (P.W. I) was recorded at
about 11 p.m. on 7.8.1999 at a hospital in relation to an incident which had H
202 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007] 6 S.C.R.

A taken place at a place known as Bhakardan. P. W. I and the deceased Janardhan
Dalvi allegedly were going to attend a weekly bazaar which is held every
Saturday. They were going on foot. Appellant Santosh crossed them from the
opposite direction. He, however, although went ahead, but all of a sudden
came back and from behind assaulted the deceased first. While P.W. I made
an attempt to prevent him from doing so, he also attacked him with a sharp
B edged weapon as a result whereof he suffered an injury on his head. Janardhan
tried to run away, but he was chased and assaulted by a sharp edged weapon.
Appellant later on ran away. Janardhan died on the spot.
,,,
/'
4. Before the learned Trial Judge, apart from P.W. 1 some other witnesses
C were also examined. Appellant, as noticed hereinbefore, was found guilty by
the learned Trial Judge. His appeal has been dismissed by the High Court.

5. Mr. K. Rajeev, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant
in support of this appeal would submit that credibility of P.W. I as an eye
witness is in question as he had made an attempt to implicate Radhakishan
D falsely. It was urged that the alleged motive for commission of the offence
namely giving of a slap to the accused by the deceased on an earlier occasion
having not been proved, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained. It was
contended that there exists a discrepancy in regard to the time factor with
regard to the lodging of the First Information Report, as although according
E to P.W. I, it was lodged at 9 p.m. The Investigating Officer, P.W. 7 stated that
he had recorded the same at 11.45 p.m. It was furthermore submitted that
seizure of the articles purported to be at the instance of the appellant herein
has not been proved.

6. Mr. Sushi! Karanjkar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
F State, however, supported the impugned judgment.

7. Homicidal nature of death of the deceased and sufferance of injuries
by P.W. I is not in dispute. Deceased had suffered two stab injuries, one on
the middle of his back and other on his chest. As indicated hereinbefore, in
the First Information Report itself, it has been alleged that the deceased was
G assaulted with a sharp edged weapon from the back first and later on he was
chased and killed. Sufferance of a large number of injuries by P. W. I Sandhu
is also not in dispute as would be evident from the medical report.

8. He suffered the following injuries:-

H (0 Incised injury on chest Rt. Side about 4 cm x l/2cm x Muscle
-
SANTOSH@SANlUKRAOv. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [S.B. SINHi.,J.] 203

depth sharp regular margin. Elliptical in shape Red base. A
(ii) Incised injury on Rt. Parital region about 4cm x Yz cm x
muscle depth Red base, Regular sharp margine Eliptical shape.

(iii) Incised injury on back over lborasic vertebra about 2cm x
Yz cm on Eliptical shape, Regular sharp margin Red base. B
(iv) Incised injury on Ltd. Shoulder Eliptical shape Yz cm Red
base Regular sharp margin.

(v) Incised injury on Rt. Side of neck about Yz cm x Yz cm, Red
base Regular Sharp margin.
c
(vi) Incised injury at the base of Rt. Thumb about Yz cm x Yzcm
Red base Eliptical shape Regular sharp margin.

(vii) Contusion on Lt. Knee anterior aspect about 2cm x lcm Red
base."
D
9. It is trite that there exists a discrepancy in regard to the time of
IOdging of the First Information Report. It is, however, not in dispute that P.W.
1 was admitted to hospital. He was being treated when his statement was
recorded by P.W. 7. According to the doctortreating him, the statement was
recorded at about 11 p.m. The Investigating Officer P.W. 7, however, stated
that it was lodged at about 11.45 p.m. The possibility of the injured's losing E
track of time by reason of sufferance of grave injuries cannot be ruled out.
Similarly the time of the recording of the statement might have been made at
11 p.m., but the First Information Report might have been lodged at about
11.45 p.m., which would not mean that the recording of the statement of P.W.
I had also started at that point of time. p
I 0. The number of injuries received by Sandhu being not in dispute
and appellant herein having been named in the First Information Report, in
our opinion, purported discrepancy in respect of the time of actual lodging
of F.I.R. is not such which would prove to be fatal to the entire prosecution
case particularly when the occular evidence is corroborated by the medical G
evidence. P.W. 1 might have taken the name ofRadhakishan also, but he had
even not been prosecuted. It is now well known that in India, the doctrine
of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus has no application. So far as non-
establishment of the motive on the part of the accused is concerned, suffice
it to say that when the prosecution case is proved by direct evidence, motive
takes a back seat. It is, however, not correct to contend that motive has not H
204 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2007) 6 S.C.R.

A been proved.

11. Before the courts below, a contention had been raised in regard to
the identity of the accused. The learned Trial Judge in view of the fact that
both the parties were resident of the same village rightly negatived the said
contention. Such a contention has not been even seriously raised before us.
B Identity of the appellant, therefore, is not in dispute. Both the courts below
have accepted the testimony of P.W. I as a natural witness. We also do not
find any reason to take a different view.

12. We may notice that P.W. I went to Fakirba Mhatarji, P.W. 3 to his
C village at the first instance. He found him in an injured condition having
suffered injuries on his head, forehead and chest. Thereafter, the other villagers
gathered. This fact is supported by P. W. 4, Sanjay and P. W. 12, Pralhad Bhikaji
Dalvi.

13. We may furthermore notice that the details of the incident was also
D intimated immediately to P.W. 3, Fakirba Mhatarji, by P.W. I. There is no
reason as to why P. W. 3 would tell a lie. So far as the recovery of some articles
at the instance of the accused is concerned, we may notice that the weapon
of assault and other articles were recovered at his instance. It contained
human blood. The shirt of the appellant was also recovered. It was also
stained with blood. Group of the blood found on the said weapon as also of
E the appellant being Group "B" matched with the blood group of P.W. I
Sandhu. We, therefore, see no reason to differ with the findings of the courts
below.

I4. For the reasons aforementioned, we do not find any merit in this
appeal which is dismissed accordingly.
F
S.K.S. Appeal dismissed.