Sneha Singh, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies
Page: 01-13
Introduction
Judges are not expected to have expertise in all the fields in which the matter remains concerned.1 This led to a situation where the scope of Expert Evidence came into play. The judges' capabilities are wider and based on this no other person has the right to intervene. An expert is however vested with the authority to prove his /her stance following relevant facts and facts in the issue. The court’s discretion is a prime facie requisite for the admissibility of an expert opinion. An expert opinion can be taken into consideration in both civil and criminal offenses. Sections covering expert opinion range from 45 to 51 of the Indian Evidence Act,1872 along with section 291 Crpc. Expert is not a person having a specific knowledge about the subject matter but he/she is the one holding a vast acumen. Sometimes the terminology expert evidence is used interchangeably with an expert witness. As per section 45, an expert witness denotes a deeper knowledge or study done by a person concerning a certain branch. In the provision, the concept of science and art was mentioned. The usage of both these words was not incidental but intentional in nature to provide a wider connotation to the reasoning of expert evidence. In the case of Hanumant vs. State of Madhya Pradesh - it was ruled by the constitutional bench of three judges that under section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act the words used i.e.- science and art will include typer writing as a form of handwriting thus gave space for a new category of experts. Earlier this there was no such a presumption existing. Through several judgments, it has been observed that expert evidence is a weak source of evidence but it can become effective after corroboration. For a critical analysis of the reliability factor on expert evidence and eyewitnesses, the associating factors should be considered. In case of contradiction between the originality of direct evidence spotted by an eyewitness and a medical examiner, it is the court's to determine whose weightage should be preferred. The opinion of an expert is having a guiding authority and hence, non-conclusive. It is the court that fills the bridge and is accountable for rendering justice. To eliminate ambiguity the case of Mahendran v. State of Tamil Nadu should be looked into - The court while pronouncing the judgment in a case related to rape and murder stated that the notion of a medical expert has recommendary nature and should not be taken into account without thorough filtration. Here the medical examiner failed and made several differing statements because of which the eyewitness was given the upper hand. There are various pros and cons in evaluating expert evidence. The aforementioned part shows advantages whereas few judges opined for the vice versa view - In People vs.Patrick- the expert opinion is influenced by self-respect and pride and can be demeaning to other valuable sources of evidence. There are a few more problems raised by the thinkers that reliance on experts will substantially result in privileges and this may be abused.
Comments