Kerala HC Accepts Police Officer's Testimony To Uphold Conviction For Forged Driving License, Says Public Usually Reluctant To Become Witness

The Kerala High Court has observed that the public often shows reluctance to become witnesses, and stated that the testimony of police officers can be admissible, if they are found to be reliable and trustworthy.A single judge bench of Justice M. B. Snehalatha further held testimony of police officer should not be viewed with distrust solely because he is a witness from the Department of Police. “Ordinarily, the public at large shows their disinclination to come forward to become witnesses. If the testimony of the police officer is found to be reliable and trustworthy, the court can definitely act upon the same. If, in the course of scrutinising the evidence, the court finds the evidence of the police officer as unreliable and untrustworthy, the court may disbelieve him but it should not do so solely on the presumption that the witness from the Department of Police should be viewed with distrust. This is also based on the principle that the quality of the evidence weighs over the quantity of evidence.”The Court was hearing an appeal against the conviction and sentence of an autorickshaw driver for showing a forged driving license as a genuine one to the police during vehicle checking. The appellant was sentenced to imprisonment of one year under Section 471 (using as genuine a forged document) of IPC. The appellant argued that there is no evidence to prove that he forged any driving licence and used it as genuine. The Court noted that sub inspector of police is the detecting officer who found the appellant with the fake driving license. This is also confirmed by another civil police officer who is also examined as a witness. The Court further noted that even the regional transport officer testified that the driving license produced by the appellant was a forged driving license and it was not issued from his office, as claimed by the appellant. The Court observed that evidence would show that the appellant showed a fake driving license to deceive the authorities that he holds a valid driving license with an intent to defraud and mislead the police. It thus stated that accused has committed an offence of using forged document as genuine to attract an offence under Section 471 IPC. Court added, “Using a fake driving licence as genuine not only violation of Section 471 IPC but also undermines and compromises road safety and public trust.”The Court further rejected the argument of the appellant that conviction cannot be merely based on the testimonies of police officials. Relying upon the Apex Court decision in Kashmiri Lal v. State of Haryana, the Court stated that there is no absolute law police officers cannot be cited as witnesses and that their testimony should always be treated with suspicion. Court stated, “It is well settled that if the evidence of the police officers is found to be reliable and trustworthy, then basing the conviction thereupon cannot be questioned. The presumption that every person acts honestly applies as much in favour of a police official as of any other person.”However, considering the fact that the alleged incident occurred before 14 years, the Court reduced the sentence of simple imprisonment of one year to simple imprisonment for three months. As such, the revision petition was allowed in part by modifying the sentence granted to the appellant. Counsel for Appellant: Advocate Sunny MathewCounsel for Respondents: Public Prosecutor Sanal P RajCase Number: Crl.Rev.Pet No. 612 OF 2018Case Title: Abhijit George v Assistant Sub Inspector of PoliceCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 39Click here to Read/Download Order

Kerala HC Accepts Police Officer's Testimony To Uphold Conviction For Forged Driving License, Says Public Usually Reluctant To Become Witness

Tellmy Jolly

Tags