Appeal against acquittal fails where eyewitness, medical evidence, and motive consistently support the prosecution case.

Ocular testimony, medical evidence, the prompt FIR and surrounding circumstances were held to support the prosecution case that the deceased was repeatedly run over by a tractor, and minor omissions in the witness account did not weaken the core evidence. The sole eye witness was found natural and trustworthy, the injuries and post-mortem findings matched the prosecution version, and the spot panchnama showing tyre marks reinforced it. Strong motive from pending civil and criminal disputes also corroborated the case. In appeal against acquittal, the SC interfered because the High Court's view was not a possible view on the record. The acquittal of two accused was set aside, their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC was restored, and life imprisonment was maintained; the acquittal of the other two accused was affirmed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the acquittal of the accused could be sustained in view of the ocular testimony, the medical evidence, the prompt first information report, and the surrounding circumstances.

Analysis: The injured, crushing nature of the injuries, the post-mortem findings, and the spot panchnama showing circular tyre marks were consistent with the prosecution version that the deceased was repeatedly run over by a tractor. The evidence of the sole eye witness was found natural and trustworthy, his presence at the scene being explained by the circumstances, and minor omissions or improvements in the report and testimony did not affect the core of the prosecution case. The strong motive arising from the pending civil and criminal disputes further corroborated the prosecution version. In an appeal against acquittal, interference was justified because the view taken by the High Court was held not to be a possible view on the record.

Conclusion: The acquittal of Basant Lal and Om Prakash was set aside, their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code was restored, and the sentence was modified to imprisonment for life; the acquittal of Lalji and Gyan Prakash was affirmed.

---