https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296405 A murder conviction based on a sole eyewitness and an approver was found unsafe where the approver's version materially conflicted with the eyewitness account and appeared to be used to fill gaps in the prosecution case. The eyewitness evidence was also rejected because he did not promptly name the assailants, gave inconsistent statements, and claimed identification in very poor lighting. Delay in lodging the FIR and the possibility of false implication from factional enmity further weakened the prosecution. On that evidence, the conviction could not be sustained and acquittal followed. en-us Thu, 22 Nov 1973 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Jul 2021 14:57:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296405 A murder conviction based on a sole eyewitness and an approver was found unsafe where the approver's version materially conflicted with the eyewitness account and appeared to be used to fill gaps in the prosecution case. The eyewitness evidence was also rejected because he did not promptly name the assailants, gave inconsistent statements, and claimed identification in very poor lighting. Delay in lodging the FIR and the possibility of false implication from factional enmity further weakened the prosecution. On that evidence, the conviction could not be sustained and acquittal followed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 22 Nov 1973 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296405