Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 17 (0.28 seconds)Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 498A in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 118 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Section 106 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
Shyamal Ghosh vs State Of West Bengal on 11 July, 2012
34. Likewise, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Shyamal Ghosh v. State of West Bengal, reported in
(2012) 7 SCC 646, wherein, at paragraphs-46 & 49, it
has been held as under:
Dattu Ramrao Sakhare And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra on 8 May, 1997
In Dattu Ramrao Sakhare v. State of
Maharashtra [(1997) 5 SCC 341 : 1997 SCC (Cri) 685]
it was held as follows : (SCC p. 343, para 5) "5. ... A
child witness if found competent to depose to the facts
and reliable one such evidence could be the basis of
conviction. In other words even in the absence of oath
the evidence of a child witness can be considered
under Section 118 of the Evidence Act provided that
54
( 2025:JHHC:13292-DB )
such witness is able to understand the questions and
able to give rational answers thereof. The evidence of
a child witness and credibility thereof would depend
upon the circumstances of each case. The only
precaution which the court should bear in mind while
assessing the evidence of a child witness is that the
witness must be a reliable one and his/her
demeanour must be like any other competent witness
and there is no likelihood of being tutored."
Ratansinh Dalsukhbhai Nayak vs State Of Gujarat on 29 October, 2003
The Bench further held as under : (Ratansinh
case [(2004) 1 SCC 64 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 7] , SCC p. 67,
para 7)
"7. ... This precaution is necessary because child
witnesses are amenable to tutoring and often live in a
world of make-believe. Though it is an established
principle that child witnesses are dangerous
witnesses as they are pliable and liable to be
influenced easily, shaken and moulded, but it is also
an accepted norm that if after careful scrutiny of their
55
( 2025:JHHC:13292-DB )
evidence the court comes to the conclusion that there
is an impress of truth in it, there is no obstacle in the
way of accepting the evidence of a child witness."
Munsh1 Prasad And Ors vs State Of Bihar on 10 October, 2001
In the aforesaid context this Court is conscious with
the fact that as per settled proposition of law, the defence
witness is also to be given equal weightage as is to be
given to the prosecution witnesses as has been held by
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Munshi Prasad v.
State of Bihar, reported in (2002) 1 SCC 351 at para 3
which reads hereunder as:--