17 June 2024


High Court of Delhi

Inder Pal and Ors. Vs. State




The motive part loses its significance, when there is trustworthy evidence of witnesses as to commission of an offence

Present appeal is directed against judgment and order of sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, whereby the learned Sessions Judge found the Appellants-accused guilty under Section 304 Part II read with Section 34 as well as Section 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

Learned counsel for the Appellants opened his submissions contending that, the witnesses examined by the prosecution to establish its case are interested witnesses and their testimonies cannot be relied upon to convict the present Appellants. The counsel for the appellants further argued that the trial court failed to take into consideration the contradictions and improvements in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. During the course of arguments, an apprehension was expressed by the learned counsel for the Appellants that motive is of paramount importance and absence of motive, in a case of direct or circumstantial evidence is critical to the version of the prosecution.

However, in the present case, there is enough evidence to show that the incident took place due to trivial issue of flow of water from the house of the complaint in the drain because of which foul smell was emanating. Moreover, in the present case the conviction passed against the appellants is under Section 304 Part II whereby the circumstances show that the incident took place due to sudden quarrel hence, the argument raised by the learned counsel for the Appellants in relation to motive is of no significance.

However, it is a settled legal proposition that even if the absence of motive as alleged, is accepted, the same is of no consequence and pales into insignificance, when direct evidence establishes the crime. Therefore, in case, where there is trustworthy evidence of witnesses as to commission of an offence, the motive part loses its significance. In the present case also, there is direct and reliable evidence in relation to occurrence of the incident, hence, not proving the motive for commission of the offence does not hold much relevance.

Placing reliance on the testimonies of PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3, read along with the medical evidence on record, the prosecution has been able to establish that, it was due to the acts of the Appellants committed in furtherance of the common intention of both, the death of the deceased and the injuries on the person of PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3 took place.

The prosecution having proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt, there is no infirmity in the judgment passed by the learned Trial Court. The conviction of the appellants under section 304 Part (II) read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 308 read with section 34 of the IPC is upheld. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Tags : Conviction Evidence Credibility

Share :