Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

26. Thus, from the aforesaid evidence, it can be said that P.W.6, the informant, is the eye witness. Relying upon the sole testimony of the eye witness, conviction can be recorded even in absence of any corroboration. However, the Court has to satisfy that the said witness is credible and his deposition is trustworthy. If the deposition of such witness is of sterling quality or if he is a sterling witness, relying upon such witness, conviction can be recorded. At this stage, we would like to refer the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Takdir Samsuddin Sheikh Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr., reported in (2011) 10 SCC 158, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed in paragraph-13(ii) as under:-

(ii) This Court has consistently held that as a general rule the court can and may act on the testimony of a single witness provided he is wholly reliable. There is no legal impediment in convicting a person on the sole testimony of a single witness. That is the logic of Section 134 of the Evidence Act, 1872. But if there are doubts about the testimony, the court will insist on corroboration.

28. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in an another decision in the case of Phool Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, reported in (2022) 2 SCC 74 has observed in paragraphs-9 and 10 as under:-

9. In Pankaj Chaudhary [State (NCT of Delhi) v. Pankaj Chaudhary, (2019) 11 SCC 575 :
(2019) 4 SCC (Cri) 264] , it is observed and held that as a general rule, if credible, conviction of the accused can be based on sole testimony, without corroboration. It is further observed and held that sole testimony of the prosecutrix should not be doubted by the court merely on basis of assumptions and surmises. In para 29, it is observed and held as under : (SCC p. 587)

"29. It is now well-settled principle of law that conviction can be sustained on the sole testimony of the prosecutrix if it inspires confidence. [Vishnu v. State of Maharashtra]. It is well settled by a catena of decisions of this Court that there is no rule of law or practice that the evidence of the prosecutrix cannot be relied upon without corroboration and as such it has been laid down that corroboration is not a sine qua non for conviction in a rape case. If the evidence of the victim does not suffer from any basic infirmity and the "probabilities factor" does not render it unworthy of credence, as a general rule, there is no reason to insist on corroboration except from Patna High Court CR. APP (DB) No.917 of 2017 dt.04-07-2024 medical evidence, where, having regard to the circumstances of the case, medical evidence can be expected to be forthcoming. [State of Rajasthan v. N.K.]."