Category: Evidence

ISSUE:

Whether the High Court correctly prioritized the medical opinion of Dr. Jatinder Singh, who performed the post-mortem, over Dr. Paramjit Singh’s conflicting expert testimony?

Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the Sessions Court’s acquittal based on the available evidence?

Whether the evidence of an extra-judicial confession be corroborated?

RULE:

Expert Testimony and Conflicting Medical Evidence: When two expert medical opinions conflict, the court generally prefers the testimony that aligns with direct evidence if it is reliable. Medical opinion serves to corroborate rather than supersede direct eyewitness accounts.

ISSUE:

Whether ocular evidence takes precedence over medical evidence in cases of contradiction?

RULE:

When there is a discrepancy between ocular and medical evidence, ocular testimony shall prevail because the medical evidence is in the nature of an expert's opinion.

ISSUE:

Whether the prosecution had presented sufficient and credible evidence to the death of Gangia Devi was because of a bomb explosion, considering the inconsistencies in the medical and ocular evidence presented during the trial?

RULE:

Medical evidence and ocular evidence must be credible, reliable, and consistent to be admissible and to establish a fact in a court of law.

ISSUE:

Whether expert opinion takes precedence over substantive evidence?

RULE:

Expert opinion should be considered but not relied upon exclusively. Testimony that is consistent, cogent, and reliable should not be disregarded, even if it contradicts expert opinion.