Allahabad High Court Says Eyewitness Testimony Alone Can Deliver Justice

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that an eyewitness to a crime is not required to lodge a First Information Report (FIR). Their testimony alone is sufficient to establish guilt.

The bench observed that many people refrain from informing the police, but that does not invalidate their evidence.

The court further said that investigative lapses, such as the failure to seize a witness’s torch, cannot be grounds to acquit an accused.

The court initially acquitted Awadhesh Kumar and Mata Prasad, but this time it reversed the decision and sentenced them to life imprisonment. It also imposed a ₹20,000 fine on each and added three years of imprisonment along with a ₹5,000 fine under IPC Section 201.

Witness Testimony Proves Justice

The trial court had acquitted the accused in 1984 for lack of evidence. However, Justices Rajeev Gupta and Harveer Singh ruled on the state government’s appeal that the trial court had wrongly disregarded the evidence.

The bench noted that key witnesses consistently confirmed the incident, and minor contradictions did not affect credibility.

Importantly, the witnesses had clearly stated they saw the attack in torchlight, and the torch was still in their possession.

The failure of police to seize it, the court said, did not weaken their testimony. The judges also pointed out the suspicious behaviour of the accused.

Immediately after Kusuma’s death, they cremated her body at dawn without informing her relatives or conducting a post-mortem.

Claiming she died of a heart attack, they tried to conceal the crime in haste, which the court described as evidence of guilty intent.

The bench called the case an ‘example of superstition-driven crime,’ highlighting how, in remote areas, people still commit heinous acts under the influence of blind beliefs.

As the case dragged on, two accused, Pramod Kumar and Kishore, died before the appeal concluded.

Yet, the High Court’s verdict carried weight- reliable witness testimony, even in the absence of an FIR, can be enough to secure justice.

Also Read: Increasing The Quantity And Charging The Old Price Despite The GST Reduction Is A ‘Fraud’, Says Delhi High Court