In Brief
The appellants were convicted of murder based on eye-witness testimony that they participated in a mob attack killing the deceased Umanath in 2007. The Supreme Court examined the consistency of eye-witness accounts. One witness (PW-6) saw a mob attack but did not specifically name any accused, while another witness (PW-11) named four accused including both appellants. The Court held that Accused No. 3's conviction based solely on PW-11's uncorroborated testimony, inconsistent with PW-6's failure to identify, was unsafe and warranted acquittal. However, Accused No. 4's conviction was upheld due to corroborating physical evidence: a knife recovered at his instance capable of causing the fatal injuries documented at post-mortem. The appeal was partly allowed, acquitting Accused No. 3 while confirming Accused No. 4's conviction.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.