Rough Draft KinjalKeya 2121-1
Rough Draft KinjalKeya 2121-1
Rough Draft KinjalKeya 2121-1
HELD: Their testimony was natural, cogent and trustworthy. Non examination of other two
witnesses would not affect the prosecution case. The testimony of injured witness is accorded a
special status in law. This is a consequence of the fact that injury to the witness is an inbuilt
guarantee of his presence at the scene of the crime and because the witness would not want to let
actual assailant go unpunished.
HYPOTHESIS:
1. The researcher presumes that The evidence of an injured eye-witness cannot be discarded
in toto on the ground of inimical disposition towards the accused particularly where his
evidence, when tested in the light of broad probabilities, it can be concluded that he was a
natural eye-witness, and had no reason to concoct a case against the accused.
2. The researcher presumes that the testimony of an injured witness holds more credence
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
The method of this research work is Doctrinal in nature.
1
TENTATIVE CHAPTERIZATION:
1. Introduction.
1.1. Who is a witness?
1.2. Types of Witness
2. Importance of Eye Witness
3. Relevant Provision in Court of Law
3.1. Section 3, Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
3.2. Section 135, IEA, 1872.
3.3. Section 138, IEA, 1872.
4. Facts and Judgment of the Case.
5. Court’s decision on evidence given by Injured Eye Witness
6. Courts decision in Evidentiary Value of Eye Witness
7. Conclusions and Suggestions.