Testimony of Official Witnesses: Judicial Assessment for Basing Convictions

Abstract

Question often arises before the courts as to whether conviction can be based on the sole testimony of official witnesses when satisfactory explanation is given for non-examination of independent witnesses. One such case in recent times is the case of Baldev Singh. In this case, possession and recovery of huge quantity of poppy husk from trolly attached with tractor driver by the accused which constituted an offence under Section 15 of NDPS Act. A plain reading of Sec 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 inferentially states that the evidence of police witnesses cannot be discarded merely because they belong to police force. The Supreme Court pointed out the difficulties on the part of prosecution to produce independent witness, when the court observed, “when the tractor was intercepted on G.T.Road and the driver of the tractor was apprehended under suspicion in odd hours of mid-night, prosecution cannot be expected to examine independent witnesses”. The Supreme Court examined the ratio in Gyan Singh which states that conviction cannot be based on uncorroborated testimony of official witnesses. However, it can be pointed out that this statement of law does not take into account where the need to have independent witnesses in the odd hours of midnight and more so there was no human habitation in the nearby place. Such a situation is bound to exist when on the highway at mid-night an incident occurs, there can be no independent witnesses, if in the place nearby there is no human habitation.The Supreme Court also ruled thus: i) There is no legal proposition that evidence of police officials, unless supported by independent witnesses is unworthy of acceptance; ii) Evidence of police witnesses cannot be discarded merely on the ground that they belong to police force and interested in the investigation and their decision to see the success of the case; iii) Prudence however, requires that the evidence of police officials, who are interested in the outcome of the result of the case needs to be carefully scrutinised and independently appreciated. The mere fact that they are police officials does not by itself give rise to any doubt about their credit-worthiness.