In Brief
Sadayappan was convicted of murdering Selvam, his neighbour, over a long-standing land dispute. The appellant challenged his conviction arguing the witnesses were relatives of the victim and hence interested. The Supreme Court held that being a relative does not automatically make a witness 'interested'—an interested witness is one who derives direct benefit from the accused's punishment. The Court upheld the conviction, finding the related witnesses' testimony credible after cross-examination, and independently corroborated by forensic evidence (gunshot injuries, gunpowder residue), recovery of the murder weapon, last-seen evidence, and the victim's widow's prompt complaint to police. The chain of circumstantial evidence proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.