The Allahabad High Court has upheld the conviction of a man for attempting to murder his wife, affirming a 1985 trial court judgment and directing him to surrender to serve his sentence.
The Court dismissed the criminal appeal filed by the appellant challenging his conviction under Section 307 of the IPC, holding that the prosecution had successfully proved its case beyond reasonable doubt primarily on the basis of the testimony of the injured wife.
Justice Abdul Shahid emphasised that the injured witness, being the wife of the accused, was a “sterling witness” whose testimony carried strong evidentiary value and could not be doubted merely due to minor inconsistencies or lack of independent corroboration. The Court ruled:
“It is highly improbable that she have any doubt about identification of her husband. It is also highly improbable that she has falsely implicated her husband in the said offence.”
The Court rejected the defence argument that the absence of independent witnesses, non-recovery of the firearm, and alleged inconsistencies between medical and ocular evidence weakened the prosecution’s case. It reiterated that the quality of evidence prevails over quantity, and a conviction can be sustained even on the testimony of a single reliable witness.
The prosecution’s case originated from an FIR lodged by the accused himself, claiming that unidentified miscreants had attacked his wife. However, during the investigation, the wife identified her husband as the assailant, leading to an alteration of charges to attempt to murder. The Court found the defence theory of unknown assailants to be implausible, noting inconsistencies in defence evidence and the improbability of the alleged entry and exit of miscreants.
It further held that in cases involving direct evidence, motive becomes secondary, though in the present case, evidence also indicated strained marital relations, dowry demands, and alleged illicit relationships.
Rejecting the plea for reduction of offence or sentence, the Court affirmed the conviction and directed the appellant, who had been on bail since 1985, to surrender within fifteen days, failing which the trial court shall take appropriate steps in accordance with law.
Appearances
Appellant- Akhilesh Singh, Ravindra Singh, Shivam Yadav, advs
Respondent- A.G.A.
