SUKHDEV YADAV Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is now well settled that the Court can sift the chaff from the grain and find out the truth from the testimony of the witnesses. The evidence is to be considered from the point of view of trustworthiness and once the same stands satisfied, it ought to inspire confidence in the mind of the Court to accept the stated evidence. This Court in Leela Ram (dead) through Duli Chand vs. State of Haryana : relying upon an earlier decision of this Court in State of U.P. vs. M. K. Anthony (1985) 1 SCC 505 : observed :

(2.) In Rammi vs. State of M. P. (1999) 8 SCC 649, this Court further observed :

(3.) It is indeed necessary however to note that there would hardly be a witness whose evidence does not contain some amount of exaggeration or embellishment sometimes there would be a deliberate attempt to offer the same and sometimes the witnesses in their over anxiety to do better from the witness-box details out an exaggerated account. In Appabhai vs. State of Gujarat, (1988) Suppl. SCC 241, this Court in paragraph 13 of the report observed :