M A I N   N E W S

SC: don’t suspect statements of witnesses with minor variations

New Delhi, October 20
Plugging a major loophole in trial proceedings, the Supreme Court has ruled that mere variations in statements of witnesses during the course of the trial without altering the facts of the case should not be a ground for disbelieving them.

A Bench, comprising Mr Justice Doraiswamy Raju and Mr Justice Arijit Pasayat, gave the ruling while dismissing a petition challenging a Delhi court’s verdict, convicting Sushil Kumar for murdering a person on a trivial ground that he had severed his association with a eunuch.

Mr Justice Pasayat, writing for the Bench, said, “merely because of the fact that there were some minor omissions, which are but natural, considering the fact that the examination in court took place years after the occurrence, the evidence does not become suspect.”

The trial court had relied on the eyewitness account to convict Sushil Kumar, who had alleged that the witness was not trustworthy as he had given a statement before the police, which was materially different from the one given in court.

Rejecting the argument, Mr Justice Pasayat said, “Minor details which are not indicated in the first information report are later on elaborated in court. This does not justify criticism that the case originally presented has been abandoned, to be substituted by another one.”

The Bench said no witness could reproduce his statement in a precise mathematical manner, adding “It is only when exaggerations fundamentally change the nature of the case, that the court has to consider whether the witness was telling the truth or not.” — PTI