The Supreme Court has upheld the conviction of a Gujarat man sentenced to life imprisonment for murder, ruling that the prosecution successfully proved its case even though several witnesses turned hostile during trial proceedings.
A Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Prasanna B. Varale dismissed the criminal appeal filed by Mitesh alias T.V. Vaghela, who had challenged the findings of the trial court and the Gujarat High Court.
Background of the Case
According to the prosecution, the incident stemmed from a quarrel on the night of December 11, 1998, near a tea stall in Ahmedabad. The dispute allegedly began after the accused threw a half-burnt cigarette into a bucket used for washing tea cups.
The deceased, Somabhai Rabari, later informed his brother about the altercation and allegedly mentioned that the accused had threatened him. The next morning, Somabhai was found seriously injured near his tea stall.
The prosecution claimed that before being taken to hospital, the injured man repeatedly told his brother that Mitesh had stabbed him. He was declared dead shortly after reaching the hospital.
The trial court convicted the accused under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The Gujarat High Court later affirmed the conviction.
The appellant argued that the prosecution case was weak because several independent witnesses and panch witnesses had turned hostile. It was also argued that the alleged oral dying declaration was unreliable since the deceased had suffered multiple injuries and may not have been conscious.
The defence further pointed to inconsistencies in medical evidence and questioned the recovery of the knife allegedly used in the crime.
The Supreme Court, however, found no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of the lower courts. The Bench carefully examined the testimonies of the complainant and another eyewitness, a rickshaw driver identified as PW-12.
The Court noted that the complainant consistently stated that the deceased named the accused both at the spot and while being taken to hospital. The Bench accepted this as a reliable oral dying declaration.
Quoting the High Court’s reasoning approvingly, the Supreme Court observed that merely because the victim later became unconscious at the hospital, it could not automatically be presumed that he was unable to speak immediately after the attack.
The Bench also relied heavily on the testimony of PW-12, who stated that he had witnessed the accused stab the deceased during a quarrel near Boringwali Chali in Ahmedabad. The witness identified both the accused and the knife used in the offence before the trial court.
“The testimony of PW-12 is, in our view, cogent, complete and of a sterling quality,” the Bench observed.
Rejecting the argument that hostile witnesses weakened the prosecution case, the Court reiterated that criminal convictions can legally rest on the testimony of even a single trustworthy witness.
“It is the quality and not the quantity of evidence which is determinative,” the Court said while referring to earlier Supreme Court precedents.
The Bench concluded that the prosecution had proved the case beyond reasonable doubt and dismissed the appeal. However, considering that the appellant had already undergone a substantial part of the sentence, the Court granted liberty to seek remission under the applicable policy.
Case Details:
Case Title: Mitesh @ T.V. Vaghela v. State of Gujarat
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 212 of 2012
Judges: Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
Decision Date: May 11, 2026
