In the year 1999, a caste war erupted in the village of Senari. Hundreds of armed miscreants from the Maoist Communist Centre stormed the area one evening, looking for members of the "Ranveer Sena." They dragged them to the village's outskirts, where 34 of them were slaughtered. Because there was no electricity in the village at the time of the occurrence, residents relied on a torchlight to identify the killers. Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 307, 302, 452, 380, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, as well as Sections 27 of the Arms Act, Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, and Section 34 of the Explosive Substances Act, were used to file a FIR. The trial court found 13 people guilty, and some of them were sentenced to death and others to life in jail. They appealed the order to the Supreme Court.
Because there was no electricity in the village at the time of the incident, the learned counsel contended, how can the eyewitnesses' testimony be trusted? Furthermore, they were strangers to them, so how can they claim responsibility for the murders? Furthermore, no TIP was carried out during the probe. They went on to say that in such a hectic scenario where everyone was running around, the witness's state of mind should be taken into account as well.
The respondents' attorney stated that there were eyewitnesses present who had recognized some of the killers with the aid of torches and had testified about it. The scene of the crime also yielded several murder weapons. While dragging and executing the victims, the killers shouted MCC zindabad.
In the absence of any corroboration, the High Court stated that the circumstances surrounding the identifications made such identifications very shaky. The conviction was predicated on a 7-year dock identification that lasted around 16 hours after the crime. As a result, the court's decision cannot be based solely on the testimony of eyewitnesses. As a result, the court overturned the Trial Court's decision and acquitted all 13 convicts due to a lack of evidence against them.