Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 makes the opinion of experts important on points of specialized areas like handwriting analysis, fingerprints, artistic impressions, scientific principles and foreign legal positions. Anyone possessing specialized knowledge in the above mentioned field would be deemed to be an expert.
As a general rule the opinion of a witness on a question whether of fact, or of law, is irrelevant. Witness has to state the fact which he has seen, heard or perceived, and noted the conclusion, form of observations. The functions of drawing inferences from facts is a judicial function and must be performed by the court.
E.g - The question is, whether the death of A was caused by poison?
-> The opinion of experts as to the symptoms produced by the poison by which A is supposed to have died, are relevant.
Expert evidence is opinion evidence and it can't take the place of substantative evidence. It is a rule of procedure that it must be corroborated either by clear direct evidence or by the circumstantial evidence.
It is not safe to rly upon this type of evidence without seeking independent and reliable corroboration [S. Gopal Reddy v. State of A.P AIR 1996 SC 2184 (Para 27)]
No comments:
Post a Comment