SUNDER Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) , J.

(2.) PROSECUTION story ex -facie cannot be accepted, as there is hardly any motive to commit the crime in question and here PW1 and PW2 both have proceeded to mention that incident in question has taken place at the point of time when they were returning from canvassing and 11:30 pm cannot be said to be appropriate time for canvassing, as such, the reason for their presence on the spot is in itself of great doubt and completely discredits the prosecution case.

(3.) THE conduct of PW2 Raju Tyagi, in the present case, is totally abnormal and same also fortifies the situation that he was not at all present on the spot and has been planted subsequently after great deliberation and consultation as such his testimony cannot be relied upon by any means.