Evidence -- Eyewitness Absent from Inquest Report -- Testimony cannot be discarded on that ground alone
(i) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, S.174 -- Evidence -- Eyewitness Absent from Inquest Report -- An inquest report serves the limited purpose of ascertaining the cause of death. There is no legal requirement to record the names of eyewitnesses, details of the FIR, or names of accused in the inquest report, nor is any eyewitness required to sign it. Absence of an eyewitness's name or signature from the inquest report or spot recovery memos is not a ground to discard their testimony. (ii) Indian Evidence Act, 1872, S.134 -- Evidence -- Motive When Direct Ocular Evidence Exists -- Proof of motive is not required where direct eyewitness testimony inspires the confidence of the court. Absence of motive does not impinge upon the reliability of trustworthy ocular evidence. Motive assumes significance only in cases resting on circumstantial evidence. (iii) Indian Evidence Act, 1872, S.134 -- Evidence -- Non-Examination of All Cited Witnesses -- The prosecution is not bound to examine every cited witness. It is the quality of evidence, not its quantity, that determines the outcome. A conviction can rest on the testimony of a single reliable witness. No adverse inference is drawn against the prosecution for dropping a witness to avoid multiplicity of evidence.
LOGIN TO READCaseLawToday.com is powered by M/s Law Herald Infotech
