State Of M.P. vs Moti And Others on 16 January, 2017
In this connection, the
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "Ugra Ahir Vs.
State of Bihar" [AIR 1965 SC 277] may be referred in which it
has been held that the doctrine of "Falsus in uno, Falsus in
omnibus" is not applicable in India. Villagers are rustic person
and therefore, possibility cannot ruled out that they would tell
falsehood. It is the duty of the court to pick up the grains of
truth from the chaff of the falsehood and if it is not possible to
do so then the court is not permitted to create a new story on
8 Cr.A.No.200/1999
its own. In the present case when the complainant Premchand
(PW-1) and Jugraj (PW-3) found injured then it cannot be
presumed that no incident took place and the respondents
have not assaulted anyone, hence it was the case in which
truth can be picked up from the chaff of the falsehood. Thus,
the trial Court committed error in discarding the evidence of
eye-witnesses, namely, Premchand (PW-1), Jugraj (PW-3)
and Syed Mohammad (PW-4).