The Supreme Court has held that an accused can be convicted even on deficient evidence as long as the same was credible and cogent.
It is the duty of court to separate grain from chaff.
Where chaff can be separated from grain,it would be open to the court to convict an accused notwithstanding,the fact that evidence has been found to be deficient,or to be not wholly credible, a bench of Justices Arijit Pasayat and Mukundakam Sharma observed.
The apex court passed the ruling while dismissing the appeal of Mani alias Udattu Man and six others convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by a sessions court in Tamil Nadu for the murder of one Prabha. The deceased was hacked to death by the accused due to previous enmity.
Even though seven of the prosecution witnesses turned hostile,the sessions court convicted the accused on the basis of the eyewitness account of Murugammal,mother of the deceased.
However,one of the accused was acquitted of the charge.The Madras High Court confirmed the sentence following which the accused appealed in the apex court.
Incidentally,the accused were acquitted in the earlier murder of Prabha’s younger brother Babu.