Delay in recording eyewitness statement cannot result in rejection of the testimony: Supreme Court

Delay in recording eyewitness statement cannot result in rejection of the testimony: Supreme Court

The apex court asserts the stand of a frightened witness can be understood

The Supreme Court has said that the delay in recording the statement of eyewitnesses cannot result in the rejection of their testimonies. The court dismissed the appeal by four petitioners challenging their conviction in a murder case.

Admitting the delay in recording the statements of the eyewitnesses, the bench headed by Justice U. U. Lalit said, "The material on record definitely establishes the fear created by the accused persons. If the witnesses felt terrorized and frightened and did not come forward for some time, the delay in recording their statements stood adequately explained."

Nothing has been brought on record to suggest that during the interregnum, the witnesses were carrying on their ordinary pursuits, the court observed. Stating that the eyewitness account could not be discarded, the apex court ruled, "We have gone through their testimonies and are convinced that their statements were cogent, consistent and trustworthy."

The top court was hearing appeals filed by the four accused challenging the order passed by the Calcutta High Court. It dismissed their pleas, confirming their conviction.

In the appeal, it was contended that the delay in recording the testimonies of the eyewitnesses would be fatal to the case of the prosecution. And that no explanation was forthcoming on the delay in recording their statement.

On the other hand, the counsel appearing for the state justified the delay submitting that the terror unleashed by the accused was of such magnitude that the witnesses had fled. He said that it was only after the investigating machinery took appropriate steps, including the arrest of the accused that the witnesses came forward.