Row over lit cigarette: Supreme Court upholds murder conviction of man who stabbed tea stall owner

The Supreme Court recently upheld the murder conviction of a man accused of stabbing a tea stall owner following a quarrel over a half-burnt cigarette thrown into a bucket used for washing tea cups and saucers. [Mitesh @ TV Vaghela v. State of Gujarat]

A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B Varale dismissed the appeal filed by the accused challenging the Gujarat High Court judgment affirming his murder conviction and life sentence.

The Court found that the testimonies of the deceased’s brother and a rickshaw driver who saw the assault, along with the surrounding circumstances, proved the prosecution’s case beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Bench reiterated that a truthful and reliable dying declaration can form the sole basis for conviction even without corroboration.

"In the present case, however, the dying declarations are not only found to be reliable but also stand corroborated by the surrounding circumstances, particularly the testimony of PW-12 (rickshaw driver),” the Court said.

According to the prosecution, Somabhai Rabari ran a tea stall in Ahmedabad. On the night of December 11, 1998, a quarrel broke out after the accused threw a half-burnt cigarette into a bucket used for washing tea cups and saucers at the stall.

The prosecution claimed that the accused had extended a threat to the deceased to the effect that he would “see him” during the altercation. The next morning, locals told Somabhai's brother (the complainant) that he was lying injured near the tea stall.

When the complainant reached the spot, Somabhai told him that the accused had assaulted him. He is also said to have repeated the allegation while being taken to the hospital in an autorickshaw, where he was later declared dead.

The complainant thereafter lodged a police complaint.

The police began investigating the case and later recovered the murder weapon, a knife, based on information provided by the accused.

The trial court had convicted the accused under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act (weapons law violation). He was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder charge.

The Gujarat High Court upheld the conviction, prompting the accused to move the Supreme Court.

Before the Supreme Court, the accused argued that he was entitled to the benefit of doubt since several witnesses, including panch witnesses and some eyewitnesses, had turned hostile.

However, the top court reiterated that criminal law places emphasis on the quality, rather than the quantity, of evidence. It added that even the testimony of a solitary witness can be sufficient to sustain a conviction if the witness is found to be wholly reliable and of “sterling quality.”

“In the case at hand, though most of the panch witnesses and eye witnesses have turned hostile, PW1 and PW12 have completely established the case of the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt,” the Court observed.

The Court ultimately affirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court and upheld by the Gujarat High Court.

The Bench, however, noted that the accused had already undergone a substantial period of sentence and granted him liberty to apply for remission in accordance with the law.

It further directed that any such plea be considered expeditiously.

[Read Judgment]