Can’t ignore proof because witness is victim’s relative, observes high court

DISMISSES PLEA

Can’t ignore proof because witness is victim’s relative, observes high court

K.Kaushik@timesgroup.com

Madurai:

Dismissing a man’s revision petition challenging his conviction in an accident case, Madras high court has observed that merely because the witnesses are related to the victim or complainant, their evidence cannot be ignored.

The prosecution case is that a person named Ramar took his daughter Munidurgadevi to Malli Bazaar at Srivilliputhur on April 18, 2009. When they were waiting to cross the road, a van driven by petitioner Balamurugan ran over Munidurgadevi killing her on the spot. Malli police registered a case against Balamurugan.

Srivilliputhur JM II court in 2010 convicted and sentenced the petitioner to oneyear simple imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs 3,000. Balamurugan appealed against the verdict in Virudhunagar district and sessions court which dismissed it and confirmed the JM’s order. He filed the present petition, challenging the trial and appellate court orders.

Justice K Murali Shankar said that it is the contention of the petitioner that the two witnesses in the case are relatives of first witness Ramar, father of the deceased. "It is settled law that the evidence of witnesses cannot be discarded merely on the ground that he is a relative or interested witness. A witness may be called ‘interested’ only when he derives some benefits from the result of a litigations or in seeing the accused person punished and a witness cannot be said to be an ‘interested’ witness merely by virtue of being a relative of the victim," observed the judge.

The judge further said that if the evidence of the relative witnesses are cogent, credible and trustworthy, the same can be relied on. In this case, both the witnesses have deposed the manner in which the accident occurred by reiterating the witness of Ramar.

The judge said that all the witnesses had stated that the van was driven at high speed by the petitioner in a rash and negligent manner. The appellate court has re-assessed the entire evidence and given its finding concurring with the JM court. The courts have rightly appreciated the evidence and arrived at correct findings. Hence, the judge dismissed the revision petition.