Question

In the case of Dattu Ramrao Sakhare v. State of Maharashtra, the Court ruled on child witness testimony. What was the key takeaway?

• A. A child must be at least 7 years old to testify
• B. A child can never be trusted as a witness
• C. A child's evidence is admissible if the court finds the child competent and truthful
• D. Children can testify only when accompanied by a parent or guardian

Hint:

Child witness evidence is admissible if the court is satisfied that the child is competent and truthful.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

Concept: A child witness is not automatically disqualified. The court must examine whether the child understands the questions and can give rational answers.

Step 1: Understand child witness competency.
Competency depends on the child's ability to understand the duty of speaking the truth and to answer questions properly. \[ \text{Competency} = \text{Understanding + Truthfulness + Rational answers} \]

Step 2: Understand the case principle.
In Dattu Ramrao Sakhare v. State of Maharashtra, the Court held that the evidence of a child witness can be accepted if it is reliable and the child is found competent.

Step 3: Reject wrong options.
There is no strict rule that a child must be at least 7 years old. A child is also not automatically untrustworthy. Therefore, the correct answer is option (C).