examined Gurvinder Singh (PW3) who is also alleged to have been an eyewitness to the incident and received injuries. Darshan Singh PW5 was also examined ... alleged eyewitness who received injury in the incident.
8. The eyewitness account given by Hari Singh (PW1) before the trial court is required
Dhanpal occurred.”
12. The involvement of every accused as deposed by the eyewitnesses and
the role ascribed to each of the accused can be tabulated ... Prakash etc.
22
14.1 The evidence led by the prosecution through the eyewitnesses account
of PW1-Sunil Kumar, PW2-Madanpal, PW6-Narain alias Jainarayan, PW24
mainly on the ground that
there are contradictions in the evidence of eyewitnesses to that of medical
evidence, prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable ... prosecution
evidence in right perspective and ignored the evidence of the eyewitnesses.
The High Court, on a reanalysis of evidence of prosecution witnesses and
other
inflicted a Gandasi blow on
his left knee. The above named two eyewitnesses raised alarm whereupon the
two accused ran away with their weapons ... below the injury no.3".
The trial court believed the eyewitnesses account given by Mohan Singh-PW6
and Sardara Singh-PW7. It also relied
such there was no occasion
to witness the occurrence by the alleged eyewitnesses. For
the aforesaid purpose, the employees of the electricity
department were examined ... burning deserved credence. The learned Sessions Judge
believed the statements of three eyewitnesses that they had
witnessed the occurrence. After considering the postmortem
report
Mannu (PW-11) and Parmal Singh (PW-13) etc. were
examined as eyewitnesses. All of them have categorically
stated that on exhortation extended by appellants ... There is no any contradiction in the evidence given
by all these eyewitnesses so that there is a difference in
their story. Learned counsel
prosecution examined as many as eight
witnesses. PW2 and PW4 were the eyewitnesses and PW7 was the
Investigating Officer. At the end of the trial ... accused persons mainly on the grounds that PW1 to
PW4 – eyewitnesses were related and interested witnesses; no
independent witness has been examined
Court’s reason for rejecting the evidence of PW-1 as an eyewitness is based on
its conclusions about the following inconsistencies in his statement ... accused
nor clearly seen the incident.
33. Trial Court on the testimony eyewitness, PW-2: The Trial Court
disbelieved the presence
Court. She would further state that it is reasonable for the
eyewitnesses, one of whom was injured in the incident, not to have seen ... appellants, that there was material discrepancies in
the evidence adduced by the eyewitnesses PW5 and PW6, with regard to the
sequence of shots fired
accused, prosecution examined 22
witnesses, PWs 1 to 6 and 11 being eyewitnesses, marked ... such a conclusion is on the
following:
The evidence of the eyewitnesses is inconsistent and not trustworthy. The
first information report did not contain
