Testimony Of Child Witnesses, Corroborated By Medical Evidence, Sufficient To Sustain Murder Conviction: SC

The Supreme Court has held that testimony of child witnesses that remains firm during cross-examination and is corroborated by medical evidence regarding the cause of death is sufficient to sustain a murder conviction.

A Bench of Justices Sandeep Mehta and Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya upheld the conviction of Kharak Singh Mehta for murdering his wife, Hema Mehta, after finding that the testimony of their two sons, who witnessed the incident, remained unshaken during cross-examination and was corroborated by the post-mortem report.

Mehta was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) [corresponding to Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)] and Sections 27 and 30 of the Arms Act. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs 20,000, with a default stipulation. The Uttarakhand High Court at Nainital dismissed his appeal on February 23, 2021, prompting him to approach the Supreme Court.

Why did the Supreme Court uphold the murder conviction?

The prosecution case was primarily based on the testimony of the couple's two sons, Master U and Master M, who told the court that they had seen their father shoot their mother dead.

Court noted that the allegation against Mehta was that he shot Hema following disputes over his alleged extra-marital relationship with another woman.

"We have been taken through the statements of these two witnesses by the counsel for the petitioner and find that both the child witnesses stood firm on the version that they saw their father, the petitioner herein, shooting their mother dead. The witnesses were cross examined at length but could not be shaken," the Bench said.

The Bench also relied on the medical evidence of Dr D S Dharmashaktu, who conducted the post-mortem examination and opined that Hema died from a gunshot injury to the head.

It held that the trial court had committed no error in relying on the two eyewitnesses, whose testimony was fully corroborated by the medical evidence.

Finding no infirmity in the Uttarakhand High Court's judgment warranting interference, the Supreme Court dismissed Mehta's special leave petition as devoid of merit.

What did the children tell the court about the murder?

The case arose from a complaint lodged by Hema's father, Prahlad Singh, at Police Station Kotwali, Pithoragarh, on August 23, 2014.

According to the complaint, Hema was married to Mehta, who was then serving in the police force. Prahlad Singh alleged that Mehta drank heavily and routinely assaulted his children.

At around 7:45 pm on August 23, 2014, Prahlad Singh was informed by his neighbour's son, Hem Singh, that Mehta had shot Hema dead with his gun.

Prahlad Singh, accompanied by his wife, Mohani Devi, friends and other villagers, went to Hema's house in Shiv Colony. They found her body lying in a pool of blood inside a room, with heavy bleeding from the back of her head.

The complaint further stated that when Prahlad Singh asked his grandsons what had happened, both children told him that their parents had quarrelled. During the altercation, their father pulled out his gun and shot their mother dead at around 7:30 pm before leaving the house.

The Uttarakhand High Court had examined the children's testimony in detail. It noted that the two boys, then aged 17 and 16, had consistently stated that their parents frequently quarrelled over Mehta's alleged extra-marital relationship.

Both children denied the defence's suggestion that their maternal grandfather had tutored them to implicate their father. They also denied the suggestion that the gun had gone off accidentally while Mehta was cleaning it.

The High Court found that the children had described the incident in detail and that there was no reason to believe they would allow the actual culprit to go free while falsely implicating their own father. It, therefore, considered their testimony reliable.

The Supreme Court agreed with the trial court's reliance on their testimony, particularly as it was supported by the medical evidence establishing the cause of death.

Case Title: Kharak Singh Mehta Vs State of Uttarakhand

Bench: Justices Sandeep Mehta and Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya

Date of Judgment: October 12, 2026