Child Witness Testimony Can Sustain Conviction Without Corroboration If Reliable: Allahabad High Court

"A child is always receptive to abnormal events which take place in his life and would never forget those events for the rest of his life", Allahabad High Court has held that testimony of an injured child witness, if found competent and inspiring confidence, carries great evidentiary value and can independently sustain conviction without necessity of corroboration. The Court emphasized that minor contradictions arising from shock, trauma or lapse of time do not affect the core prosecution case.

Competency and Reliability of Child Witness

The Division Bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh and Justice Devendra Singh-I noted that PW-8 Krishna Kumar was aged about seven years at the time of incident. Before recording evidence, the Trial Judge had conducted preliminary examination and only after satisfaction recorded his statement.

Relying on State of Madhya Pradesh v. Balveer Singh (2025 INSC 261), the Court held that "The Evidence Act does not prescribe any minimum age for a witness, and as such a child witness is a competent witness and his or her evidence cannot be rejected outrightly."

The Court emphasized that "before the evidence of the child witness is recorded, a preliminary examination must be conducted by the Trial Court to ascertain if the child-witness is capable of understanding sanctity of giving evidence and the import of the questions that are being put to him."

The child witness had deposed that when he and his grandmother reached near the Jamun tree, Yogesh fired at his grandmother, which hit the witness on the thigh. All three accused knocked down his grandmother, beheaded her with weapons and hung her head from the tree.

The Court held: "Although, he was subjected to lengthy cross-examination, but nothing adverse could be elicited from his mouth to make the prosecution story doubtful. Further, PW-8, Krishna Kumar is an injured witness and his presence at the place cannot be doubted."

Minor Contradictions Not Fatal

Addressing alleged contradictions, the Court held the discrepancies were trivial and did not affect the foundation of the prosecution case. The medical evidence of Dr. Surendra Goyal established the child had suffered lacerated wound with blackening around the wound, confirming firearm injury from close range.

The Court explained: "All the accused persons as well as deceased and the injured PW-8 were present nearby and PW-8 after being hit by the bullet, fled towards his home, there was no difficulty for him to see the other part of the incident, wherein his grandmother was hacked to death by the accused."

Drawing on Supreme Court precedents, the Court held that "in the depositions of witnesses there may always be some normal discrepancies. These discrepancies are due to lapse of time and mental disposition such as shock and horror at the time of the occurrence."

Doctrine of Falsus in Uno Not Applicable

The Court categorically rejected the doctrine of falsus in uno falsus in omnibus. Citing Hangovan v. State of Tamil Nadu (2020) 10 SCC 533, the Bench held that "this maxim has not received general acceptance in different jurisdictions in India nor has this maxim come to occupy the status of a rule of law. It is merely a rule of caution."

Defence Plea of Alibi Rejected

The Court found the defence version through DW-5 Raj Kumar unreliable. DW-5 claimed he reached the spot at 4:00 PM and was the first person to reach. However, the FIR was lodged at 4:30 PM mentioning occurrence at 3:15 PM. PW-7 SI Atar Singh deposed he reached the spot at 3:45 PM and arrested appellant Lakhmi with Daav.

The Court held: "It is clear that the incident in question took place at 03:15 PM as claimed by the prosecution and the story set up by the defence through the evidence of DW-5 Raj Kumar has no leg to stand."

No Corroboration Mandatory

The Court clarified that corroboration is not mandatory for child witness testimony. Relying on Dattu Ramrao Sakhare v. State of Maharashtra (1997) 5 SCC 341, the Bench held: "There is no requirement or condition that the evidence of a child witness must be corroborated before it can be considered."

The Court emphasized: "In case the child explains the relevant events of the crime without improvements or embellishments, and the same inspire confidence of the court, his deposition does not require any corroboration whatsoever."

Chain of Evidence Complete

The Court noted the child witness's testimony was corroborated by PW-1 Devi Singh (informant), PW-2 Het Ram Verma (son of deceased), and medical evidence. Dr. Kishore Kumar's post-mortem confirmed incised wound at C-5 vertebrae with head separated from body, and stab wound below navel. FSL reports confirmed human blood on seized articles including Daav, trident, knife and bloodstained clothes.

The Court held: "We are of the view that the prosecution has successfully proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt against all the accused persons."

The Allahabad High Court's judgment reinforces that competent child witnesses who withstand cross-examination and whose testimony inspires confidence can form the sole basis for conviction without corroboration. The dismissal of the appeal affirmed the conviction and sentences, with all appellants directed to remain in jail to serve out their sentences.

Date of Decision: 18.03.2026