Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

17. It is contended by the learned senior counsel for the accused that while P.Ws.10 and 13 would state that when they were talking with their friends (P.Ws.11 and 14), each of the accused came to confess, while P.Ws.11 and 14 would state that as they were going towards the office of the respective Village Administrative Officers, they found the respective accused there talking with the concerned Village Administrative Officers. It is true that such a position appears on record. It must be noticed that the occurrence was in the year 1995 and these witnesses were examined commencing from 2004 onwards. Therefore there is a possibility of a human error in remembering facts - which may not have a real bearing on the prosecution case, which had happened several years before. But one thing is clear from the evidence of P.Ws.11 and 14 and that is, they heard the respective accused confessing to the respective Village Administrative Officers on the death of the victim in this case. Since we have found that P.Ws.10, 11, 13 and 14 are trustworthy witnesses, merely because there appears to be a striking similarity in the contents of Exs.P.7 and P.11 as to the modus operandi adopted by the accused in committing the crime, that by itself would not destroy the prosecution case. The contents of Exs.P.7 and P.11 on all the crucial aspects may have a striking similarity. But it may be an accidental coincidence as well. It is not as though the words used are peculiar only to one individual and not known to the other and on the other hand those words are common words. The sequence of events found disclosed in Exs.P.7 and P.11 are one and the same. Therefore in telling the sequence of events, the words that are commonly used alone are used. Under these circumstances, we are not inclined to reject Exs.P.7 and P.11 on the sole ground that the contents of those two documents on the crucial aspect have a striking similarity. In this context, it must be noticed that A2, in his confession, had stated that he questioned A1 as to why he committed the act of throttling the victim? For all the reasons stated above, we have no difficulty at all in holding that Exs.P.7 and P.11 are true and voluntary disclosures made by A1 and A2 to P.Ws.10 and 13 respectively; P.Ws.11 and 14 witnessed the respective confessions; the evidence of P.Ws.10, 11, 13 and 14 are trustworthy and reliable and therefore Exs.P.7 and P.11 can be safely acted upon.