Child witnesses can be pliable, easily influenced: HC

Delhi High Court has observed that though child witnesses are "dangerous" as they could be easily influenced, there was no obstacle in accepting their evidence if the courts find it truthful after careful scrutiny.
A bench of Justices G S Sistani and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal said a trial judge may resort to the examination of such a witness which could disclose the child's capacity and intelligence as well as his or her understanding of obligation of an oath.
"Though it is an established principle that child witnesses are dangerous witnesses as they are pliable and liable to be influenced easily, shaken and moulded, but it is also an accepted norm that if after careful scrutiny of their evidence the court comes to the conclusion that there is an impress of truth in it, there is no obstacle in the way of accepting the evidence of a child witness," the bench said.

The court observed this while dismissing an appeal filed by a man challenging the trial court order acquitting four persons of charges of murder and criminal conspiracy, in a case in which his brother had died here in 2008.
The bench noted in its judgement that precaution regarding intelligence of a child witness was required to be taken as they were "amenable to tutoring and often live in a world of make-believe".
The case pertains to the death of a man whose body was found in a pool of blood having stab injuries here in August 2008.

The counsel appearing for the petitioner sought setting aside of the trial court's March 2012 verdict acquitting the four accused in the case.

His lawyer had argued that the case was based on the testimony of victim's daughter who was an eye witness to the incident.
The high court observed that evidence of the girl recorded during the trial "has no credibility and does not reveal a truthful approach and her evidence appears to be tutored by the appellant."
It further observed that the witness had not withstood the cross-examination by defence counsel as there were "material improvements and exaggerations".
"Furthermore, she has not stuck to her statement made during investigation in all material particulars. That being so, the trial court was justified in not relying on her testimony," the court said.