BENGALURU: A woman vendor in HAL vegetable market in Bengaluru, sole eyewitness to a murder, played a key role in the conviction and sentencing of an accused to life imprisonment.
The entire case was standing on Salma’s eyewitness account after many witnesses among those examined turned hostile. The murder took place just 10ft from Salma’s shop, where she was selling vegetables. Relying solely on her eyewitness account, holding it creditworthy, the court accepted the case of the prosecution which considered Salma a star witness. She stood like a rock, at a time when many witnesses abstain from supporting the prosecution, despite the law being there for protection.
Civil and sessions court judge Somashekar A sentenced Mohammad Amjad (38), a resident of Vibhuthipura in the city, to undergo life imprisonment and pay a fine of Rs 50,000, based on her evidence.
The court noted that Salma, being the sole eyewitness, had clearly stated that the accused had murdered Syed Abdulla. Nothing was elicited in her cross-examination to discredit her testimony, and she withstood the rigour of cross-examination. Salma’s testimony is corroborated by the testimonies of complainants, postmortem reports etc. All these aspects point to the accused having committed the offence, the court added.
Abdulla and some others allegedly raped Amjad’s sister in November 2013, and Amjad, harbouring enmity, murdered Syed Abdulla around 8am on August 2, 2015, near HAL vegetable market, stabbing his chest, stomach and other parts of the body with a button knife.
Counsel for the accused pointed out minor discrepancies in the prosecution to claim the benefit of doubt. The court, however, said the entire case of the prosecution cannot be rejected for not mentioning the eyewitness in the First Information Report, and does not indicate that Salma was not on the crime scene.
The court further said the Supreme Court, in the case between Jayaram Shiva Tagore and others and the state of Maharashtra, held that, “Conviction based on the testimony of a sole eyewitness is permissible, but a rule of caution has to be maintained. However, minor discrepancies are not fatal to the prosecution case.”
The court further said a witness can see the occurrence and her presence at the spot may be made out from the statement given by the witness and surrounding circumstances.