Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.20 seconds)Section 114 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 133 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 157 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Article 136 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Bishan Lal Gupta vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 12 January, 1978
A reading of the deposition of the complainant shows
that it has a ring of truth around it. Section 133 of the
Indian Evidence Act says that an accomplice shall be a
competent witness against an accused person and a conviction
is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the
uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. But the rule of
practice is that it is prudent to look for corroboration of
the evidence of an accomplice by other independent evidence.
This rule of practice is based on human experience and is
incorporated in illustration (b) to section 114 of the
Indian Evidence Act which says that an accomplice is
unworthy of credit unless he is corroborated in material
particulars. Even though a victim of rape cannot be treated
as an accomplice, on account of a long line of judicial
decision rendered in our country over a number of years, the
evidence of the victim in a rape case is treated almost like
the evidence of an accomplice requiring corroboration. (Vide
Rameshwar v. The State of Rajasthan,(1) Gurucharan Singh v.
State of Haryana(2) and Kishan Lal v. State of Haryana).
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
1