Evolving Standards Of Child Witness Testimony: A Comparative Analysis Of English And Indian Jurisprudence

The child witnesses have often remained critical pieces of evidence in distinct cases, namely, those concerning domestic violence, their abuse, and murder, where they are the only eyewitnesses available to the court. The reliability of the children, however, becomes a moot question because they are all too often subject to influences and have limited cognitive development. The Indian courts have gradually moved toward a more balanced approach, but English law has gone far into major reforms with regard to child witnesses. This article thus focuses on the history and current position of child witness testimony in English law, how the transformation occurred in Indian jurisprudence, and what the Supreme Court's recent judgment could mean.

The Position of Child Witnesses in English Law

Historically, English law has always exhibited a wary attitude towards child witnesses. Under common law, children under seven were presumed incapable of giving testimony owing to a supposed inability to tell truth from falsehood. Testimony from those above this age could only be adduced after an inquiry into their competence as witnesses.

The principle enshrined in 19th-century law, requiring corroboration for child evidence, highlighted the abiding distrust of children's ability to give reliable evidence. Courts were stringent about the child taking an oath, and testimonies received from younger children were dismissed on several occasions since they were unable to comprehend the consequences of taking an oath

Modern Reforms:

The various theories and legal alterations brought about a drastic change in the perceptions of child witnesses under the English legal systems.

1. Criminal Justice Act 1988: The Act did away with the necessity for the corroboration of a child's testimony and, instead, put the burden on the court to assess its reliability in each individual case.

2. Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999: The Act came up with several adaptations aimed at minimizing trauma and intimidation; these include video testimony and live link evidence. Other arrangements allowed special rules for child witnesses, which included the use of screens to shield them from direct confrontation with the accused. The Act in question set credibility assessments, rather than basing them on some episodic standard of age.

3. Judicial precedents: The English courts have gradually accepted that child witnesses can tell the truth and give reliable evidence if and when proper examination is applied and their evidence sustains evaluation on its merits. This observation places more emphasis on the reliability of the content of the statements, rather than chronological age.

Modern English law treats child witnesses as competent if they can understand questions and give rational replies. Courts rely on procedural safeguards such as psychological assessments, expert witnesses, and available corroborative evidence. Nowadays, the judiciary focuses on whether the testimony is internally consistent and free of undue influence, rather than imposing arbitrary restrictions based on age. The changed attitude since the 1992 Child Witnesses Act toward young child witnesses has greatly reinforced that assumption. However, while they are commonplace in criminal cases, these interpretations or understandings from the perspective of child witnesses cannot count as unique for testimony.

The Evolution of Child Witness Testimony in Indian Law

In the same line with English law, the earlier Indian jurisprudence kept much skepticism with respect to child witnesses. The courts required corroboration and did not find it sufficient enough to convict on the sole evidence of a child. Slowly, however, the Indian courts have moved towards a more widened horizon.

1. Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan (1952): The landmark judgment held that child testimony, much scrutinized, does not require compulsory corroboration in the absence of grounds for suspecting tutoring or fabrication.

2. Dattu Ramrao Sakhare v. State of Maharashtra (1997): The Supreme Court once again reiterated that when a child witness appears to be truthful and consistent, the said testimony could alone furnish the basis for conviction.

Numerous guiding principles for assessing child testimony have been enunciated by Indian courts:
• The courts must inquire as to whether the testimony was given voluntarily and unaffected by any external pressure.

• The mannerisms of the child and the consistency of the statement given by the child are parameters that weigh heavily with regard to credibility.

• The judge must be aware of any signs that might show coaching, suggestibility, or memory distortion on the part of the child, especially during any long legal proceedings.

Legislative Provisions

To an extent, the Indian legal regime concerning child witnesses is mainly about the Indian Evidence Act of 1872 (Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023). The following provisions are noted:
• Section 118: Whoever can understand the questions posed to him or her and give rational answers is deemed a competent witness; this includes children.

• Section 119: Witnesses unable to communicate verbally may use other means, to include sign language or written testimony.

• POCSO Act, 2012: The rules introduced were seen to be child-friendly so that child victims of sexual assault could testify with minimum trauma.

The Recent Supreme Court Judgment and Its Significance

In Madhya Pradesh v. Balveer Singh (2025 INSC 261), the apex court reversed the acquittal pronounced by the High Court while deciding that the testimony of a child witness need not be ignored outright. The act involved a murder of a woman where the main witness was her son, a minor. The High Court had rejected this testimony saying it was on ground of being at such an age, which led to the acquittal of the accused. The Supreme Court, however, came up with different arguments:

1. Age-Based Rejection Eliminated: The court at large denounced the blanket rejection of a child's testimony stating that one has to look at merits to see if the same had credibility.

2. Reliability Comes Above Corroboration: The judgment emphasized that testimony of the child witness, if found to be reliable, can be the sole basis for conviction.

3. The Judicial Scrutiny Emphasized: The ruling stated that trial courts are to safeguard child witness evidence rather than dismiss it as inherently unreliable.

Potential Impact of the Judgment on Future Cases

Supreme Court Judgment has far-reaching consequences for Indian criminal jurisprudence in domestic violence, sexual abuse, and family disagreement cases.

1. Enhanced Child Witness Testimony in Criminal Trials: The judgment certainly strengthens the rationale for admittance of child testimony based on merit rather than their blanket rejection. It promotes the of structured forms for the assessment of credibility, which could lead to procedural innovations such as expert psychological evaluations by courts.

2. Shift in Judicial Presumptions: To counter conventional judicial presumptions regarding children as unreliable witnesses, the judgement challenges such standing arguments. It prompts lower courts to scrutinize carefully child evidence instead of applying antiquated standards of corroboration.

3. Applicability in Cases of Sexual and Domestic Abuse: Most of the child witnesses who fell victim to sexual abuse are, in fact, potential sources of conviction. The ruling takes its cue from protective statutes such as POCSO as it affirms in legal proceedings the place of children's voices as victims.

4. Urgent Need for More Protection: With increasing reliance on child witness testimony, the courts would have to facilitate much stricter mechanisms such as-requiring:
Trained judges inasmuch as developing standards of applicability of child psychology.
Using video-recorded statements to lessen the trauma and avoid repeated depositions.
Adequate legal provisions encapsulating provisions against undue influence and coaching of child witnesses.

5. Harmonization with International Standards: This judgement would bring the jurisprudence of child witnesses in India in accordance with the international conventions like that of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which espouses the right of children to be heard before the courts. It also brings Indian law to the level of the English legal system, where child testimony is assessed on credibility rather than on a rigid age-based criteria.

The jurisprudential framework for child witness testimony hath undergone a thorough development within the English and Indian legal systems. Child witnesses were traditionally viewed with suspicion under the common law system, but the modern-day procedure has come to increasingly according to evidentiary value to child witnesses, though with careful judicial scrutiny. In the landmark decision of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Shyamlal, the Supreme Court commented on a huge development in Indian law where the weight of merit must overshadow the age of the child on the judicial scale for purposes of evaluating child testimony.

From the viewpoint of the judicial workings, there ought to be a balance between justice for the victim and the possibility of miscarriage of justice through suggestibility or external influence upon the child. The judgment represents further relevance in that it strengthens the position of the child witness and brings the Indian system of law into line with global best practices in cases dealing with child testimony for criminal matters.

Views are personal.