child victim on 30th September, 2013, despite the
search operations being undertaken and the police
having visited the crime scene twice within his
knowledge. This vital omission on part of the witness
(PW-9) completely discredits his version and thus, we
conclude
that
Dipendrakumar
Dhirendranath
Shukla (PW-9) is not a reliable witness.
46. Pradipkumar Ganesh Rawat (PW-14) stated, in
his evidence, that he was residing near the Unnati
Woods and used to work as a watchman. His duty
hours were between 08:00 A.M. to 08:00 P.M. He
used to go home to have lunch usually around 12.00
P.M. The witness (PW-14) claimed that he knew the
accused appellant from before because he too was
engaged as a watchman and was residing at a gap of
4 to 5 rooms from the room in which the witness
resided. He stated that the accused appellant went to
take lunch at about 12:00 P.M. on 30th September,
36
Criminal Appeal No(s). 1954-1955 of 2022
選擇目標文字3
連接到段落
連接到實體
取消高亮顯示
新增到目錄