AIR 1960 KERALA 301 ::1960 Ker LT 430

Kerala High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): K. Sankaran , C.J. AND T. C. Raghavan , J

(A) Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.118— Child witness - Competency - Duty of court to record questions put and answers given to satisfy himself about competency. There is no bar legally to accept even the uncorroborated testimony of a child witness and only prudence requires that the court should not act on the uncorroborated evidence of a child.(Para 4) It is very desirable that a trial judge should preserve on record, apart from the evidence of the child witness in the case, the questions he put to the witness in the preliminary examination and the answers, which would help the appellate court to come to the conclusion whether or not the trial judge's decision in regard to the competency of the child witness was right or wrong. (In this case, however, there was a statement of the Sessions Judge that he had questioned the witnesses and was satisfied that they were able to realise that they should speak the truth and were also in a position to give pertinent answers, and the High Court said that in view of this, it did not think that there was any infirmity attached to the evidence of these witnesses.)(Para 4) (B) Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.323, S.302, S.320, S.326— Accused aged 16 years and deceased studying in VI standard - Boyish quarrel - Accused hi....