Therefore, identification by Tara Singh (PW-1) and Varun Singh (PW-4) of the appellant- Guman Singh as one of the perpetrators who had fired on Shiv Charan and Babu Singh (PW-3) is unreliable and should not be accepted without substantial corroboration and supporting material/evidence to establish involvement of the appellantGuman Singh. On the aspect of corroboration, prosecution relies upon the FSL report, exhibit P-48, opining that barrel residue examination of ‘8mm/.315’ country-made pistol (W/1) had revealed that pistol had been fired, but, definite time of its last firing could not be ascertained. The FSL report also opines that it was not possible to link definitely the ‘8mm/.315’ Soft Round nose Copper Jacketted Bullet ‘B/1’ from packet ‘D 1’ with the country-made pistol (W/1) from packet ‘E’ due to lack of sufficient evidence.Thus, the bullet ‘B/1’ recovered from the body of Babu Singh (PW3) would not be matched with the country-made pistol. The bullets recovered from the body of deceased Shiv Charan were not sentfor ballistic examination and comparison. This is surprising as bullets were certainly recovered from the body of the deceased Shiv Charan and no explanation is forthcoming why these bullets were not sent for ballistic examination.
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1475 OF 2017 GUMAN SINGH ….. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN ….. RESPONDENT(S) J U D G M E N T…
Post to Tumblr