Authors
Caesar Roy
Abstract
Witness, may be defined as someone who presents evidence, before any court of law. Section 118 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 explains competency of witness. So according this section a kid of gentle age can be permitted to attest if he had rational capability to comprehend the queries and present logical explanations thereto. As per the law, no precise age has been fixed, in order to exempt them from presenting evidence before the court, on the grounds that they don’t possess the required understanding. The evidence presented by a child witness must be assessed more cautiously and with more alertness, this is because a child is vulnerable to be influenced by what others tell them and thus a child witness is an easy target to instructing. This article describes meaning and competency of witness under the Indian evidence Act. Competency of child witness and value of such child witness are analytically discussed in this article with decided case laws. Lastly some effective suggestions are put forward to make this provision more effective. Key Words: Child witnesses, Competency of witness, evidence, Voir dire, Corroboration
Introduction
Child witnesses are generally prone to tutoring and when something is repeated to them by their elders, they begin to imagining them and really feel them to be the truth. Their innocent brains are like blank papers and can retain anything written over them by repeated communication. But that does not mean that they cannot remember anything. The memories of children are also better and what they see specially when under strain, they seldom forget for a long time unless it is over written by some effort. It is not that what they state is always result of imagination but is that same may sometimes be on effect of imagination created by others and for that one needs another to cast that imagination and then lastly the duty of court would be to work out portions improved and deal with them according to law. Under section 118 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 a child is competent to testify, if it can understand the question put to it and give rational answers thereto.
References
M. MONIR & DEOKI NANDAN, PRINCIPLES AND DIGEST OF THE LAW OF EVIDENCE 2037-2038 (2001)
Id.
A.I.R 2008 S.W.C 1460 : (2008) 12 S.C.C 565 : (2009).1 S.C.C (Cri) 454
A.I.R 2009 S.C 2292 : (2009) 6 S.C.C 712 : (2009) 3 S.C.C(Cri) 1
A.I.R 2004 S.C 23 : (2004) 1 S.C.C 64; See also GollaYeluguGivindu v. State of A.P, A.I.R 2008 S.C 1842
A.I.R 1993 S.C 2275 : 1993 Cri.L.J 2605(SC) : 1993 Supp.(3) S.C.C 667
Black’s Law Dictionary 2041 (8th ed. 2008)
P. RAMANATHA AIYAR, THE LAW LEXICON 1965 (2nd ed. 2000)
Wharton’s Law Lexicon 1049-1050 (1999)
DR. A.R. BISWAS, ENCYCLOPAEDIC LAW DICTIONARY 1512 (2008)
S. SARKAR, LAW OF EVIDENCE 2127 (16th Edition, 2007)
A.I.R 1998 S.C 2726 : (1998).7 S.C.C 177 : 1998 S.C.C. (Cri) 1561
A.I.R 1983 S.C 274 : (1983) 2 S.C.C 14
A.I.R 1959 S.C 959 : 1995 Cri.L.J 1461(S.C)
SARKAR, Supra note 11
Id, at 2123
Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan, A.I.R 1952 S.C 54 : 1952 Cri.L.J 547(S.C)
2001 Cri.L.J 3719(Raj.)
2001 Cri.L.J 4460(Raj.)
A.I.R 1952 S.C 54 : 1952 Cri.L.J 547(S.C)
(1997) 5 S.C.C 341; See also State of Karnataka v. ShantappaMadivalappaGalapuji and others, A.I.R 2009 S.C 2144
A.I.R 1946 P.C 3
(2006) 13 S.C.C 516 : (2008) 1 S.C.C (Cri.) 109
A.I.R 1994 S.C 1068 : 1995 Supp (4) S.C.C 416
A.I.R 2003 S.C 1088 : 2003 (3) S.C.C 21
(2001) 9 S.C.C 129
A.I.R 2004 S.C 3566
198th Report on Witness Identity Protection and Witness Protection Programmes, LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA (June 01, 2017, 08.07 PM) http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/rep198.pdf
How to cite this article?
| APA Style | Roy, C. (2019). Position of Child Witness under Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – An Analytical Study. Academic Journal of Law and Judiciary, 1(1), 18-24. |
| Chicago Style | |
| MLA Style | |
| DOI | |
| URL |