In Brief
Three female appellants were convicted along with two male co-accused for an alleged assault arising from a land dispute, based primarily on the victim's trial testimony alleging their participation. The Supreme Court acquitted the female appellants after finding contradictions between the original FIR (which assigned specific roles only to the male accused) and the victim's later courtroom allegations against the women. Medical evidence showed injuries inconsistent with the alleged participation of the female accused. The Court held that an injured witness, though generally reliable, requires careful scrutiny where enmity and vendetta exist, and subsequent allegations lacking independent corroboration or medical support must be discarded as exaggeration.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.