Answer :

          In the olden days Quantity rather than quality was emphasized. But  now the rule accepted in all systems of jurisprudence is the evidence should be weighed, not counted. Even if there is only one witness, and the court is satisfied that he is speaking the truth and not misleading the court it is sufficient; the fact that there are a number of witnesses means nothing if the court thinks they are not speaking the truth.

      Section 134 of Indian Evidence Act,1972 it declares that, "No particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required for the proof of fact ." how many witnesses are necessary for the poof of a fact is wholly left to the judgement of the Court.


  
It is not the number of witness Relevant Case law  :

Binay Kumar Singh V. State of Bihar 1997, 1 SCC.283

       In this case court held that, there is no rule of evidence that no conviction can be based unless a certain number of witnesses have identified a particular accused though it may be prudent to insist on at least two reliable witnesses in cases of unlawful assembly of a large number of persons.

In Karnik Malhar V. State of Bihar :

         Court Held that Convictions can be based on the evidence of single eyewitness if his credibility is not shaken in any manner. It is quality and not quantity that counts. Evidence is weighed but not counted.  

Rang Bahadur Singh Vs. State of U.P. (2000) 3 SCC 454 :2000 SCC (Cri) 703. In this case court said that Even though eye witnesses  have been examined the non examination of a person whose testimony may destroy there veracity would cast a doubt on the prosecution case.

 

0 comments:

Post a comment

See Also..