SC: Once a fact has been proved beyond reasonable doubt, any partial statement that had been doubted cannot be taken up as a defense to shake the version of the prosecution

The Apex Court on 15.02.2019, in KRIPAL SINGH v STATE OF RAJASTHAN[1]  , had dismissed  the appeal that was made against the High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan’s order and judgment which confirmed that appellant’s conviction for the omission of murder that had been passed by the Trial Court.

FACTS:

A written report was submitted to the Police Station stating the incident wherein the informant along with his brothers had gone to the agricultural farm in the village on a motorcycle describing the attack upon the deceased.

On their way back home, the accused along with four other had surrounded them with weapons and started attacking them, the informant and the other person could escape but the deceased could not as a result of inflicting severe blows resulted in the deceased’s death.

An FIR was registered and all the four accused were arrested and charged under various Sections 302, 394, 394/34, 324 or 324/34 IPC which was denied by them   and further claiming trial. The appellant was convicted further being sentenced under the sections of   302, 204, 394 and 324 IPC, thereby resulting in an appeal before the  State of Rajasthan   along with an appeal against the    acquittal of the co-accused persons, which eventually faced dismissal thereby  affirming the Trial Court’s judgment. Being aggrieved, an appeal by special leave was made to the Apex Court.

DECISION HELD BY THE APEX  COURT:
The Apex Court while dismissing the appeal held that the statement made by the eye­witness along with injuries sustained, recovering of weapons as well as the vehicle followed by the doctors ‘statements stated  that such injuries upon the head which had been attributed to the appellant would be enough in causing death, which in turn  steer clearly had corroborated with the case of the prosecution leaving no stone unturned to uphold the active  involvement of the appellant in committing the crime. Hence, once a fact has been proved beyond reasonable doubt, any partial statement that had been doubted cannot be   taken up as a defense to shake the version of the prosecution.