HC reiterates FIR is not an encyclopedia but it is information given at the first instance; can’t be the sole basis to discard testimonies

 

A single judge bench of the Odisha High Court comprising of Justice V Narasingh reduced the sentence of the appellant on account of his clean conduct for the past 33 years. While addressing some important questions of law, the court acknowledged that the contradictions in the FIR and the subsequent version have to be borne in mind while evaluating the complicity of the accused. But that cannot be the sole basis to discard the testimony of a witness who has otherwise withstood the scrutiny of cross-examination and whose version is found to be cogent.

Facts:

One herd of cow damaged the crops raised by one Bhaji Putel and he drove out the cow as a result of which there was a hot exchange of words between said Bhaji Putel and one Sashidhar Putel. It is the assertion of the prosecution that during the quarrel, the present Appellant along with others came to the spot and started assaulting the said Sashidhar Putel for which he sustained bleeding injuries on his head and under his left ear and fell down on the ground. P.W.5-Ratnabati Putel, who is stated to be an eye witness and related to both accused as well as said Sashidhar Putel shouted for help and then P.W.4 and others came to the spot and tried to rescue Sashidhar Putel. It is stated that injured Sashidhar Putel was shifted to hospital but unfortunately during the course of treatment, he passed away after three days of occurrence and thus Kantabanji P.S. Case No.121 of 1989, which was initially registered under Section 307/34 IPC was turned to one under Section 302/34 IPC. Learned trial court found the present Appellant to be guilty of having committed an offence under Section 304-II IPC while acquitting him under Section 302 IPC and as already noted, the present Appellant was directed to undergo R.I for 7 years under Section 304-II IPC.

Observations of the Court:

The court rejected the learned Amicus Curiae’s contention that there is discrepancy in the evidence of P.W.5 as stated in the FIR and in her deposition in court. It was held that it is trite law that FIR is not an encyclopaedia but it is an information given at the first instance. No doubt, the contradictions in the FIR and the subsequent version have to be borne in mind while evaluating the complicity of the accused. But that cannot be the sole basis to discard the testimony of a witness who has otherwise withstood the scrutiny of cross-examination and whose version is found to be cogent.

 

Taking into account the genesis of the offence, it was held that the evidence of P.Ws. 5 and 6 the approach of the learned trial court in convicting the Appellant-Debraj Putel under Section 304-II IPC cannot be faulted in as much as each person is supposed to have the knowledge of his overt act. Hence, the Court was persuaded to sustain the conviction of the Appellant under Section 304-II IPC.

With regard to the sentence, the court acknowledged that law is no longer res integra that while sentencing an accused his conduct during and after the occurrence has to be taken into account since this Country does not follow the retributive jurisprudence. The age of the Appellant was 16 years at the time of occurrence and in the meanwhile 33 years have passed and his conduct does not indicate any innate criminal proclivity. Thus, the court directed the sentence of the Appellant - Debraj Putel for the offence under Section 304-II IPC to be reduced to the period of incarceration already undergone.

Decision: 

The bail bond stood cancelled and the surety was ordered to be discharged.The appeal, accordingly, was disposed of.

Case: Debraj Putel vs. State of Odisha 

Citation: CRA No. 53 of 1991

Coram: Justice V. Narasingh

Pronounced on: 12.10.2022 

Read Judgment ;

 

 

 

Social media is bold. 

Social media is young.

Social media raises questions.

 Social media is not satisfied with an answer.

Social media looks at the big picture.

 Social media is interested in every detail.

social media is curious.

 Social media is free.

Social media is irreplaceable.

But never irrelevant.

Social media is you.

(With input from news agency language)

 If you like this story, share it with a friend!   

We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure .