New Delhi, September 21
Observing that quality of evidence has far greater relevance than quantity, the Supreme Court has ruled that it is not necessary to examine all witnesses in cases involving ghastly acts committed in public places.
Such acts “may very well create a sense of fear and shock in the minds of witnesses and thus prevent them from coming forward and deposing against the perpetrators of the crime,” a Bench comprising Justices Dalveer Bhandari and MK Sharma reasoned in their recent verdict.
“If the testimonies of those witnesses, who have deposed during the trial, are otherwise found to be reliable, trustworthy and cogent, the said evidence cannot be disbelieved or discarded merely because the prosecution has failed to examine other witnesses allegedly present on the spot,” the Bench ruled on September 18.
The court made the remarks while setting aside the ruling of the Allahabad High Court that had acquitted three persons convicted by the trial court in a case involving the shooting down of two youths in full public view in May 1994. Raj Narain Singh, the father of the victims who was an eyewitness, had challenged the February 2002 HC order that had set aside the trial court's February 1996 conviction.
Further, the judgment written by Justice Sharma for the Bench pointed out that Section 134 of the Evidence Act “provides that no particular number of witnesses is required for proof of any fact.”
“It is not the number of witnesses but it is the quality of evidence which is required to be taken note of by the courts for ascertaining the truth of the allegations made against the accused,” the Bench said citing
trite law.
