85 23.06.2011 have not been accepted. The omission to examine Nandakumar is also inconsequential, given the sequence of reporting of the crime, and the rapidity of the events which developed after it. No doubt, Abhay Tiwari noticed the right shoe with a bullet hole, first; however, PW-20 was also with him; he deposed to the fact of its discovery and seizure. Similarly, the failure to examine constable Dinesh is also not fatal, given the testimony of PW-29 and PW-30. 160. In Shivaji Sahebrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra70 , this court held that even where a case hangs on the evidence of one eye witness, it may be enough to sustain the conviction given sterling testimony of a competent, honest man although as a rule of prudence courts call for corroboration; it was observed that "It is a platitude to say that witnesses have to be weighed and not counted since quality matters more than quantity in human affairs." Kartike Malhar v. State of Bihar71 referred to previous decisions, and stated: "On a conspectus of these decisions, it clearly comes out that there has been no departure from the principles laid down in Vadivelu Thevar case and, therefore, conviction can be recorded on the basis of the statement of a single eye witness provided his credibility is not shaken by any adverse circumstance appearing on the record against him and the court, at the same time, is convinced that he is a truthful witness. " 161. Therefore, unless it is shown that the omission to examine a witness, who had previously participated during the investigation and whose statement was recorded by the police, undermines the prosecution case, or impacts on it significantly, the foundation of the fact or facts which are sought to be proved, remains unshaken as long as that fact is deposed to or spoken about by other witnesses, whose testimonies are to be seen in their own terms. Therefore, the omission to examine the individuals left out, but who the prosecution claimed, had participated during the investigation, did not affect its case, as far as the circumstances held to have been established by it, are concerned. Having dealt with contentions of the accused, and also discussed circumstances that could be 70 (1973) 2 SCC 793 71 (1996) 1 SCC 614