Supreme Court upholds murder conviction, calls Trial Court's acquittal unsustainable

The core issue is whether the High Court correctly reversed the Trial Court's acquittal based on the credible eyewitness testimony of the deceased's wives, despite the Trial Court's reliance on discrepancies in the time of death and other factors.

Who it concerns: Appellants: Shekappa and Ors. (A-1 to A-7); Respondent: State of Karnataka; Bench: Justice K. V. Viswanathan.

What the court decided

• The Court upheld the High Court's decision to reverse the Trial Court's acquittal.
• The Court found the Trial Court's judgment to be 'totally unsustainable' and 'wholly unreasonable' for discarding crucial eyewitness evidence.
• The Court affirmed that the direct evidence of eyewitnesses PW-17 and PW-18 was credible and corroborated by medical evidence.
• The Court held that inferences based on digestive timings (time of death) could not refute the credible eyewitness accounts regarding the time of the murder.
• The Court noted that motive is established but pales into insignificance where direct trustworthy evidence exists.

Also in the document

• The judgment is marked as 'REPORTABLE'.
• The Court cited the principle from 'Arulvelu and Another vs. State' that an appellate court should not disturb an acquittal if two reasonable conclusions are possible, but found only one view (guilt) was possible here.
• The Court criticized the Trial Court for 'glorifying non-essential aspects' while discarding direct eyewitness versions.