7. It seen that the prosecution has not examined any independent witness. All the witnesses referred to above are the officials of the complainant and it could be presumed that their witnesses are interested. No doubt, merely because a witnesses are interested, their testimony cannot be discarded or thrown away, but the Court has to assess it with great care and caution and keeping in mind whether otherwise the witnesses are reliable and trustworthy. But, the case on hand is different. It is to be noted that the Taluk Office is always a busiest place, as the people come there to find solution to various issues and applying different kinds of certificates for different purposes. It is found that there was possibility for securing independent witness at the time of occurrence and still, for the reasons best known to the prosecution, has not secured then in a given set of fact, the court can raise presumption about embellishment and view the testimony with suspicion. Hence, this circumstance alone can be fatal for prosecution. In the light of the above, this Court is inclined to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.21 of 2014, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Salem District
Crl.O.P.No.3775 of of 2015 in M.P.No.1 of 2015 S.S.Krishnamurthy … Petitioners / Accused No.1 Vs. 1.State by : The Inspector of Police, Salem Town Police Station, Salem City (Crime No.1143 of 2012) … 1 st Respondent/ Complainant 2.S.Ramalingam … 2 nd Respondent/ Defacto Complainant – PRONOUNCED ON : 01.04.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/index.php/casestatus/viewpdf/578588
URL:
