Evidence Assignment

WITNESS
A witness is a person who has personally

seen an event happen. The event could be
a crime or an accident or anything.
Sections 118 – 134 of the Indian Evidence
Act, 1872 talks about who can testify as a
witness, how can one testify, what
statements will be considered as
testimony, and so on.
WHO MAY TESTIFY
Sec 118 of Indian Evidence Act says All persons shall be competent to testify unless the
Court considers that
they are prevented from understanding the questions put to them, or from giving rational
answers to those
questions, by tender years, extreme old age, disease, whether of body or mind, or any other
cause of the
same kind.
CAN A CHILD BE WITNESS
● A small child of even 6 or 7 years of age can testify if the

Court is satisfied that they are capable of giving a rational
testimony. In the case of Raju Devendra Choubey v. State of
Chhatisgarh, the sole eyewitness of murder was a child of 13
years old, who worked as a house servant where the incident
took place. He identified the accused persons in the Court.
However, the accused persons had no prior animosity with
the deceased and were acquitted as the case could not be
proved against them beyond reasonable doubts. Only in case
there is evidence on record to show that a child has been
turtored, the court can reject statement partly or fully.him and
provided him with food, shelter, clothing, and education.
WITNESS UNABLE
TO
COMMUNICATE
VERBALLY
Section 119 of the Act says that a person who is not able
to communicate verbally can testify by way of writing or
signs. A person who has taken a vow of silence and is
unable to speak as a result of that vow will fall under
this category for the purpose of this Section. In the case
of Chander Singh v. State, the High Court of Delhi
observed that the vocabulary of a deaf and dumb witness
may be very limited and due care must be taken when
such witness is under cross-examination.
CAN JUDGES TESTIFY?
● A judge or a magistrate is not compelled to answer any
question regarding his own conduct in the Court, or
anything that came to his knowledge in the Court – except
when asked via special order by a Superior Court as stated
in Section 121. He may, however, be subject to examination
regarding other matters that happened in his presence while
he was acting as a judge or a magistrate. In the case of
Empress v Donnelly, the High Court of Calcutta stated that a
Judge before whom a case is being tried must conceal any
fact that he knows regarding the case unless he is the sole
judge and cannot depose as a witness. It was held that such a
judge cannot be impartial on deciding the admissibility of
his own testimony. He will not be capable of comparing his
own testimony against that of others.
CAN ACCOMPLICE BE A
WITNESS?
● Section 133 of the Act says that an accomplice to a crime is competent
to be a witness against the accused. The conviction made on the basis
of such testimony is not illegal. An accomplice is a person who is
guilty of helping the accused to commit a crime. He can be
appropriately described as a partner in the crime of the accused. In the
case of Khokan Giri v. The State of West Bengal, it was held by the
Apex Court that even though an accomplice can be a competent
witness, it would not be very safe to make a decision solely relying on
his testimony. The Court suggested that the testimony of an
accomplice should not be accepted by any court without corroboration
of material facts. Such corroboration must be able to connect the
accused with the crime and it must be done by an independent,
credible source. This means that one accomplice cannot corroborate
with another.
TYPES OF
ACCOMPLICE
THE PRINCIPAL IN THE FIRST THE PRINCIPAL IN THE
DEGREE SECOND DEGREE
Also called ‘principal offender’, this is a This refers to someone who is present at
person who has actually committed the the crime scene and helps the principal
crime. There can be multiple persons offender in any way.
who committed the crime together,
each one of them will be principal
offenders.
NUMBER OF
WITNESS
● There is no prescribed number for minimum or maximum witnesses to be in a case in
any provision. Section 134 lays down the same. It says that there is no requirement of
a particular number of witnesses to prove any fact. The same was held in the case of
Amar Singh v. Balwinder Singh, wherein the Supreme Court said that if out of all the
witnesses, only two or three have been examined, it will not mean that the prosecution
was incorrect.
THE CREDIBILITY OF A
SINGLE WITNESS
● In the case of Ramesh Krishna v. the State of Maharashtra, there were multiple
witnesses who could not stand with their statements given during the investigation.
On the other hand, one of them stood firmly with his statement who was deemed to
be a credible witness. The Court, in this case, held that – the testimony of one
credible witness will outweigh the same given by other questionable witnesses. A
witness is considered to be credible if he stands by his statements and the same can
be proved later on. In Binay Kumar v. the State of Bihar, the Supreme Court said
the same; it held that there is no rule of evidence that conviction can not happen
unless there is a particular number of witnesses to identify the accused.

Evidence Assignment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evidence Assignment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evidence Assignment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WITNESS

A witness is a person who has personally

● A small child of even 6 or 7 years of age can testify if the

You might also like