Evidence to be weighed not counted

Evidence on record is to be measured for quality, not on the basis of quantity. If the testimony is of ‘sterling quality’, resting a conviction thereon would be entirely permissible. The law of evidence does not require any particular number of witnesses to be examined in proof of a given fact. If there is a testimony of a single witness, the court may classify the oral testimony into three categories, namely, (i) wholly reliable, (ii) wholly unreliable, and (iii) neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. In the first two categories there may be no difficulty in accepting or discarding the testimony of the single witness. The difficulty arises in the third category of cases. The court has to be circumspect and has to look for corroboration in material particulars by reliable testimony, direct or circumstantial, before acting upon the testimony of a single witness. As a general rule the court can and may act on the testimony of a single eyewitness provided he is wholly reliable. But if there are doubts about the testimony, the courts will insist on corroboration. It is not the number, the quantity but quality that is material. The time-honoured principle is that evidence has to be weighed and not counted.