BAGARSAI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The following judgment of the Court was dictated on Board by Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.

(2.) The facts, briefly stated, are as under:

(3.) Mr. Vivek Shrivastava, counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued that according to the first information report (Ex.P/1), Manglibai (PW/1) was not an eye-witness as the incident was narrated to her by her daughter Phoolmati; Phoolmati, who was solitary eye-witness, was not examined by the prosecution; Manglibai (PW/1) in the first information report or in her diary statement never stated that she was an eye-witness. Therefore, she was not reliable and conviction based on her solitary testimony cannot be sustained.