EVIDENCE & PROOF By M IAN A LI H AIDER L.L.B., L.L.M. ( CUM LAUDE) U.K. SESSION TRAIL. PROOF & EVIDENCE ORAL EVIDENCE PROOF OF FACTS BY ORAL EVIDENCE ORAL EVIDENCE MUST BE DIREct 1 ST STAGE OF ORAL EVIDENCE COMPETENCY AND COMPELLABILITY CRDIBILITY
EVIDENCE & PROOF
MIAN ALI HAIDER
L.L.B., L.L.M. (CUM LAUDE) U.K.
“where it is found that a witness has falsely implicated one accused person, ordinarily he would not be relied upon with regard to the other accused in the same occurrence. But if the testimony of such a witness is corroborated by very strong and independent circumstances……”
“by itself means no more than evidence tending to confirm other evidence”
“ corroboration is only required or afforded if the witness requiring corroboration or giving it is otherwise credible. If his evidence is not credible, a witness’s testimony should be rejected and the accused acquitted, even if there could be found evidence capable of being corroboration in other testimony. Corroboration can only be afforded to or by witness who is otherwise to be believed. If a witness’s testimony falls of its own inanition the question of his needing, or being capable of giving, corroboration does not arise”
“what I said in Kilbourne was not that to give or require corroboration a witness must be believed without doubt. What is said, and what I meant, was that unless a witnesses evidence was intrinsically credible, he could neither afford corroboration nor be thought to require it. In such cases, the witnesses evidence is rejected before the question of corroboration arises. Ofcourse, a conviction in such a case can sometimes result if, notwithstanding the unreliable testimony, the independent evidence is strong enough. But this because the independent evidence has proved the case independently of the unreliable witness, and not because the unreliable witness is corroborated”
An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person, except in the case of an offence punishable with hadd and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.
The Court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case.
(b) that an accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborated in material particulars ;