The division judge bench of Justice Harish Kumar and Justice A.M Badar of the Patna High Court in the case of Subhash Paswan, son of Late Naresh Paswan vs The State of Bihar held that the testimony of a child witness cannot be discarded if the witness has intellectual capacity to understand the questions and able to give rational answers thereof.
Brief Facts:
The factual matrix of the case is that the deceased and the informant went to the house of Mukhiya to prepare the labour card and after returning home, the deceased went to Gohal and slept in the Palani. Thereafter, Subhash Paswan, Bibhash Paswan, Deep Narayan and Surendra Paswan armed with Bhala, Lathi and Garasa came to the house of the deceased. Furthermore, Subhash Paswan, the appellant, grabbed both of his father's legs, while Bibhash Paswan grabbed the head. Next, Deepu Paswan, the appellant, assaulted his father's neck with a garasa, causing his neck to be cut. The case was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution examined 12 witnesses, however, the defence refused to examine any witness.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant contended that there is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence and there are various inconsistencies in the testimonies and are not reliable. Furthermore, it was claimed that P.W.5 was only around 10 years old at the time of his deposition and that his statement suggested that he had received tutoring. It was also contended that the prosecution has not been able to prove the motive behind the occurrence.
Contentions of the State:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the state contended that the conviction of the appellants by the judgment in question is valid and is supported by the depositions of P.W.1, P.W.2, P.W.3, P.W.5, and P.W.6, whose testimony has also been confirmed by the investigating officer. It was furthermore contended that the post-mortem report depicts that the death was homicidal.
Observations of the Court:
The Hon’ble Court observed that when it comes to P.W. 5's depositions, who was only 10 years old at the time of his deposition, it is unnecessary to point out that Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, which governs witness competency, states vague terms that anyone, regardless of age, is qualified to testify if they can understand the questions asked of them and provide clear answers to them. If deemed competent to testify to the facts and a reliable source of evidence, a child witness could serve as the foundation for a conviction.
The court relied upon the judgments titled Dattu Ramrao Sakhare and Others Vs. State of Maharashtra, Ratansinh Dalsukhbhai Nayak Vs. State of Gujarat, and P. Ramesh Vs State Represented By Inspector of Police in which it was held that while the confession of a minor witness is not required to be disregarded per se, the court is advised to examine it carefully and only record a conviction based on it after being satisfied with its credibility and quality.
It was furthermore observed that the ability of a child witness to testify is up to the trial court, and no set standard can be established for the level of intelligence and knowledge required of a child witness to be a credible witness.
It was noted that the fundamental rule for appreciating a witness who is uneducated and from poorer socioeconomic strata is that their testimony should be taken into account as a whole. The untrained witness, in contrast to the educated witness, is not expected to remember every minute detail of the occurrence and how it occurred, especially when his testimony is recorded after some time has passed. Furthermore, a witness will undoubtedly experience shock over the sudden deaths of his close relatives. It is unlikely that the rustic witnesses will have a precise sense of time, making it impossible for them to accurately recount the sequence of events.
It was also noted that except for a few inconsistencies or discrepancies, nothing has been discovered that calls into question the witness's veracity or integrity, which would undermine the core foundation of the prosecution case.
Based on these considerations, the Hon’ble Patna High Court was of the view that the prosecution has established this case beyond reasonable doubt and confirmed the judgment and the order of sentence by the learned additional session judge.
The decision of the Court:
With the above direction, the hon’ble court dismissed the appeal.
Case Title: Subhash Paswan, son of Late Naresh Paswan, Resident of village- Itwa, Police Station- Gouradih, District- Bhagalpur Vs The State of Bihar
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harish Kumar and Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.M Badar
Case No: Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 685 of 2014
Advocates for the Appellant: Mr. Anamul Haque, Advocate Mr. Najmul Hoda, Advocate Mr. Pranjal Kumar, Advocate
Advocates for the Respondents: Mr. Binod Bihari Singh, APP
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :