In a criminal appeal stemming from a 1996 murder case, a two-judge Bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal of the Supreme Court noted that the denial of the opportunity to pose pertinent questions to an independent eyewitness significantly prejudices the accused's defense. 

The Court emphasized that, given the substantial elapsed time of 27 years since the incident, remanding the case for further cross-examination of the witness was impractical.

The case involved five accused individuals, with one facing charges under Section 109 read with Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of a man. The High Court had acquitted the accused in response to an appeal, a decision challenged through two appeals before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court, considering the case's circumstances, highlighted the presence of houses and an ongoing prayer at a nearby Hanuman temple near the crime scene. It criticized the police for not recording statements from other potential eyewitnesses. The Court rejected arguments minimizing the impact of preventing specific questions during the cross-examination and asserted the accused's right to question prosecution witnesses.

The Court expressed doubts about the credibility of the witnesses' accounts and criticized the failure to record statements from independent witnesses. Despite acknowledging plausible conclusions based on the prosecution witnesses' evidence, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's judgment of acquittal, refusing to interfere with it.

Case: Chandrasekhar Patel v. Suresh & Ors,

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 1163/2018 with CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1164/2018.

Click to read/download Judgment.