STATE Vs. RAHUL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this order we are considering the issue of evaluation of the competency of a child to testify in court proceedings. The instant petition has been filed under Section 378(I) of the Cr.P.C. seeking leave to appeal against the judgment of acquittal dated 20th October, 2011 whereby the respondents herein was acquitted of the charges punishable under Sections 376 and 377 of the Indian Penal Code by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in the case arising out of FIR No.45/2010, registered by the police station Nabi Karim.

(2.) Upon consideration of the leave petition, we had directed issuance of notice for the service of the respondents on the 3 rd of September, 2012. However, the notice was not served upon the respondents and, therefore, the notice was again directed to be issued.

(3.) Mr. Dayan Krishnan, learned Additional Standing counsel for the State has submitted that quite apart from the challenge on merits, there is a very important aspect of the criminal trials which requires to be immediately addressed, especially in the light of the proceedings in the present case. Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Additional Standing Counsel has placed a copy of the statement of the child victim, who was examined as prosecution witness no.6 in the trial on the 21st of April, 2011. He has drawn our attention to the manner in which the learned trial judge has conducted the competency test of the child witness. It is submitted that the matter of conducting the test for competency of a child witness to depose is a critical part of the child testimony and unfortunately insufficient attention is being paid to it. Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Additional Standing Counsel urges that most courts have a set pattern of questions which are put indiscriminately to every child witness. As a result there is no real assessment of the capacity and capabilities of the child, thereby impacting the quality of the child evidence. He impresses upon us that this aspect deserves immediate attention. It is pointed out that so far as consideration of this aspect of the child witness testimony is concerned, no issue arises and it is independent of and does not impact the consideration of the case on merits. The matter has been listed today for this purpose alone.