In Brief
Two brothers and their sister-in-law were convicted of murdering a man and his sister. The appellants challenged the convictions, arguing that courts wrongly relied on eyewitness testimony from the victims' family members (father and brother), claiming such testimony was inherently unreliable due to family bias. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, holding that witness credibility depends on evidence quality and consistency, not family relationship. A witness is 'interested' only if they benefit from the outcome—mere kinship is insufficient. The Court found the family members' testimony cogent, consistent with medical evidence, and properly scrutinized by trial courts. School attendance records allegedly supporting one accused's alibi were unreliable as all students were marked present despite likely absenteeism."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.