Evidence Of Interested Person Can Be Considered If It Is Corroborated: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that the evidence of interested person can be considered provided such evidence is corroborated by other evidence on record.

The bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy observed that a close relative who is a natural witness cannot be regarded as an interested witness.

In this case, the accused was concurrently convicted in a murder case. The prosecution case was that the accused had murdered the deceased because of the alleged relationship between his wife and the deceased. Before the Apex Court in appeal, he contended that two witnesses in this case, are brother and mother respectively of the deceased, and thus are interested witnesses and the conviction is based on the testimony of these interested witnesses, to prove that deceased was last seen with the accused. Opposing this contention, the state contended that merely because witnesses who are brother and mother of the deceased were examined to prove the case of the prosecution, same is no ground to discard their testimony, if the same is corroborated along with other oral and documentary evidence on record.

"Merely because PW­3 and PW­12 are related, by itself is no ground, to reject their testimony. Further, a close relative who is a natural witness cannot be regarded as an interested witness. It is fairly well settled proposition that even the evidence of interested person can also be considered provided such evidence is corroborated by other evidence on record., the court observed.

The bench  referred to the decision in Ram Chander & Ors. v. State of Haryana (2017) 2 SCC 321, in which it was observed that there is no proposition in law that relatives are to be treated as untruthful witnesses. 

Taking note of the other evidence on record, the bench found that prosecution has proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt by leading cogent evidence. 

Case: Rahul vs. State of Haryana [CRA 262 OF 2021]

Coram: Justices Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy

Counsel: Adv Tathagat Harsh Vardhan, AAG Dinesh Chander Yadav

Citation: LL 2021 SC 130

Click here to Read/Download Judgment