Home Judgments & Orders Supreme Court Evidence Under The Head Of Interested Person To Be Taken Into Consideration...

Evidence Under The Head Of Interested Person To Be Taken Into Consideration Only If It Is Corroborated: Supreme Court

198

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court observed that evidence under the head of interested person can be taken into consideration only if such evidence is corroborated by other evidences on record. The divisional bench comprising of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice R. Subash Reddy discovered that a close relative who came out to be a natural witness cannot be deemed as an interested witness.

In the case of Rahul versus state of Haryana, the accused was convicted in a murder case which is punishable under section 302 read with section 34, IPC and section 25 of the Arms act. The prosecution case was that that the accuse had murdered the deceased because of the affair between his wife and the deceased. Before the Supreme Court in appeal, he presented to witnesses in the case, who were brother and mother of the deceased. Hence considered as interested witnesses.

The final judgment is based on the testimony of these interested witnesses in order to prove that the deceased was last seen with the accused. In the opposition with this content, the state presented that because the witnesses who are brother and mother of the deceased, they were inspected to prove the case of the prosecution with respect to the testimony, along with the oral and documentary evidence on record.

The court observed that “merely because PW3 and PW 12 or related, by itself is no ground, to detect their testimony. Further, a close relative who is a natural business cannot be regarded as an interested witness. It is fairly well settled proposition that even the evidence of interested persons can also be considered provided such evidence is corporate it by other evidence on record.”

The divisional bench referred to the decision in Ram Chander and others v. state of Haryana (2017) 2 SCC 321, in which it was concluded that there is no proposition in law that relatives can be treated as untruthful witnesses.

After considering the other evidences on record, the bench found that the prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.

Read Judgment:

[tnc-pdf-viewer-iframe file=”https://dailylawtimes.in/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Evidence_SC.pdf” width=”600″ height=”800″ download=”true” print=”true” fullscreen=”true” share=”true” zoom=”true” open=”true” pagenav=”true” logo=”true” find=”true” current_view=”true” rotate=”true” handtool=”true” doc_prop=”true” toggle_menu=”true” language=”en-US” page=”” default_zoom=”auto” pagemode=””]

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here