Bishna @ Bhiswadeb Mahato vs. State of WB

• The facts of the case are that  An incident takes place in a village in the morning and that too at the harvesting time, presence of the villagers and in particular those who claim right, title, ownership as well as possession of the land in question is not unnatural. 
• An occurrence took taken place on the previous day. The witnesses did not say that they had run away from their land to some other place. They merely said that they retreated to some extent and thereafter they were chased. 
• The assault on the deceased as also other prosecution witnesses took place almost at the same place.
• The investigating officer found the dead body of Prankrishna as well as Nepal Mahato in an unconscious condition near about the same place.

Whether the testimonies of the witnesses are reliable enough for the accused to be convicted?

• The Supreme Court concluded that the two witnesses rushed to the place of occurrence of the crime immediately after the incident took place. They found 3 victims, one lying dead, another lying unconscious and the third victim who was the mother of the deceased who was also injured. The Injured and other witnesses told them about the entire incident in detail. 
• It was held that the evidence given by these two witnesses held a corroboratory value to the evidence produced by the prosecution and also corroborated with the allegations made in the FIR and hence it was covered under the doctrine of res gestae.