BADRI vs STATE OF RAJASTHAN

The Supreme Court held that the mere fact that a witness's statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not automatically render their testimony suspect. The Court found that the evidence of P.W. 1, the sole eyewitness, was not absolutely reliable and required corroboration, which was not sufficiently provided by P.W. 5. The discrepancies in P.W. 1's statements and the lack of cross-examination of P.W. 5 led to the conclusion that the conviction could not be upheld, resulting in the allowance of the appeal.