Vijaya Singh & Anr. vs. State of Uttarakhand 2024 (SC) 928

The Apex Court held that the delay in recording the statements of witnesses (PW-3 and PW-4) will not affected the credibility. That facts of the cases are as follows: 

• The case involved an appeal filed by Vijaya Singh and another appellant against their conviction by the Trial Court and High Court. 
• The appellants were accused of committing a homicide. The case was primarily based on circumstantial evidence. 
• Witnesses PW-3 and PW-4 testified against the appellants. These testimonies were recorded by the Judicial Magistrate on 09.10.2003, several days after the incident. 
• The circumstantial evidence provided no clear refutation by the appellants to break the chain of events leading to the conviction. 
• The Trial Court and High Court had earlier convicted the appellants, which was now being challenged in the Supreme Court. 
• The case revolved around the testimony of PW-3, who had a sense of attachment to the deceased, leading her to give a statement against her own family, which added credibility to her statement. 

• Whether the delay in recording the statements of witnesses (PW-3 and PW-4) affected their credibility? 
• Whether the conviction based on circumstantial evidence was justified? 
• Whether the Trial Court and High Court correctly appreciated the evidence on record? 

• Credibility of Witness Testimonies: Despite the delay in recording the witness statements, the Court found no evidence to suggest they were unreliable or influenced, and the attachment of PW-3 to the deceased added credibility to her statement.
• Circumstantial Evidence: The Court emphasized that, given the lack of any evidence disproving the circumstantial chain, the conviction was justified.
• Judicial Consistency: The Court reaffirmed that when both lower courts had consistently found the appellants guilty based on sound reasoning, the Supreme Court would not disturb those findings on mere speculation.