KHIMJI KURJIBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) * * * *

(2.) It was very vehemently contended before us by Mr. Thakore that as far as this demand and attempt at obtaining illicit gratification is concerned the complainant who is a proverbial interested witness like an accomplice stood uncorroborated. It is too much to expect corroboration on all material parts. All that is required by law as laid down by take Supreme Court is that an interested witness like a complainant in a trap case should be corroborated in some material particulars so as to lend assurance to the court that his proverbial open-to-doubt testimony also is worthy of credit. In the course of our judgment we shall show that there is good deal of general corroboration to the say of the complainant.

(3.) As we went through the deposition of the complainant we found that this villager pursuing agriculture was subjected to searching crossexamination. We were surprised to find that despite searching crossexamination? which at times was scathing also be stood the ordeal quite well. On the contrary the impression that we gathered from the series of repeats given by him to various questions put to him in the course of the cross-examination was that he was truthful. It appealed to us that had he been in any way banking on his imagination rather than real state of affairs he would have surely faltered here and there and would have exposed Himself to the charge of prevarication.