ISSUE:
- Whether sole testimony of child witness admissible under the Indian Evidence Act?
RULE:
- Sole testimony of a child witness is unreliable if there is a delay in its presentation, increasing the likelihood of coaching or tutoring.
BHAGWAN SINGH & ORS V. STATE OF M.P.
Bhagwan Singh & Ors v. State of M.P. [AIR 2003 SC 1098]
FACTS:
- On the night of 28th-29th February 1984, the three appellants allegedly entered Mata Prasad’s house and killed him and his daughter Munni Devi.
- The prosecution’s main evidence was the testimony of Arvind Kumar, a 6-year-old child at the time of the incident.
- Arvind did not disclose the incident to his maternal uncle or father immediately after it occurred.
- The trial judge noted Arvind’s hesitance, faltering answers, and failure to understand some questions, raising doubts about his testimony.
- The trial court acquitted the accused, but the Madhya Pradesh High Court later convicted them based on the child’s testimony.
HELD:
- The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s conviction and upheld the trial court’s acquittal.
- It held that mere dock identification by a child is insufficient without corroborative evidence. No test identification parade under Section 161 CrPC was conducted.
- The court emphasized that while children are competent witnesses, a 6-year-old may lack the maturity to provide reliable testimony without corroboration.
- The judicial confession of the accused was deemed involuntary due to the custody preceding the confession, rendering it unreliable.
- The court agreed with the trial judge that neither the child’s testimony nor the confession conclusively proved the accused’s guilt.