Who may Testify? Section 118 of Indian Evidence Act – Judiciary Exams

Table of Contents

Witness

A witness is a person who has personally seen an event happen. The event could be a crime or an accident or anything.
Section 118- 134 of the Indian Evidence Act,1872 talks about who can testify as a witness, how can one testify, what statements will be considered as testimony, and so on.
A witness who needs to testify before the Court must at least have the capacity to understand the questions that are posed to him and answer such questions with rationality. Sections 118, 121 and 133 of the Act talks about the capacity of a witness.

Any person who has witnessed the event is competent to testify, unless – the Court considers that they are unable to understand the questions posed to them, or unable to give rational answers as prescribed in Section 118.
Rational answer is not be expected from those of tender age, extreme old age, or a person with a mental disability.

A small child of even 6 or 7 years of age can testify if the Court is satisfied that they are capable of giving a rational testimony.
In the case of Raju Devendra Choubey v. State of Chhatisgarh, the sole eyewitness of murder was a child of 13 years old, who worked as a house servant where the incident took place.

Section 119 of the Act says that a person who is not able to communicate verbally can testify by way of writing or signs.
A person who has taken a vow of silence and is unable to speak as a result of that vow will fall under this category for the purpose of this Section.

A judge or a magistrate is not compelled to answer any question regarding his own conduct in the Court, or anything that came to his knowledge in the Court – except when asked via special order by a Superior Court as stated in Section 121.
So, if a magistrate has been summoned to testify regarding his conduct in the Court, no one can raise any objection if he is willing to do so.
A magistrate or a judge is a competent witness and they can testify if they want to but they are not compelled to answer any question regarding their conduct in the Court.

Section 122 the Act says that an accomplice to a crime is competent to be a witness against the accused. The conviction made on the basis of such testimony is not illegal.