Section 125: Witness Not to Express Opinion

Overview

Section 125 of the Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, establishes a fundamental rule about what witnesses can say in court. Simply put, a witness should stick to the facts they personally know and avoid offering their opinions. Unless a witness is a qualified expert, their personal beliefs or guesses aren’t allowed as evidence.

Key Principles / Ingredients

• Type of Evidence: This section primarily applies to oral evidence (what a witness says in court), but the principle extends to how other evidence is presented. It impacts the admissibility of documentary and electronic evidence if it relies on a witness’s opinion to interpret it.
• Conditions for Admissibility/Relevancy: Testimony is admissible only if it’s based on personal knowledge of facts. If a witness starts offering opinions without being an expert, that part of their testimony is generally considered irrelevant and won’t be allowed.
• Burden of Proof Implications: This section doesn’t directly shift the burden of proof. However, excluding opinion-based testimony can affect a party’s ability to meet their burden. For example, if a key piece of evidence relies on a non-expert’s opinion, excluding that opinion weakens the case.

How Courts Use this Provision

Judges routinely apply Section 125 to ensure testimony remains factual. If a witness begins to speculate or offer conclusions not based on direct observation, the opposing lawyer will likely object. The judge will then rule whether the testimony is admissible, often sustaining the objection and instructing the witness to answer based on facts only. The court will assess if the witness is qualified as an expert before allowing an opinion.

Illustrations and Examples

• Example 1 – Simple Situation: A witness sees a red car speeding through an intersection. They can testify, “I saw a red car go through the intersection quickly.” They cannot testify, “I think the driver was trying to run a red light.” (That’s an opinion about intent).
• Example 2 – More Complex Situation: A witness describes a person’s behaviour as “nervous.” The opposing lawyer objects. The judge might allow the testimony if the witness describes specific actions that led them to believe the person was nervous (e.g., “He was fidgeting, avoiding eye contact, and sweating”). However, simply saying “He seemed nervous” is likely inadmissible as a bare opinion.

Important Provisos / Explanations

Section 125 doesn’t have specific provisos or explanations attached to it. The key lies in the definition of ‘fact’ versus ‘opinion’ and the qualification of ‘experts’ under other sections of the Bill. The Bill clarifies that opinions are admissible if the witness possesses special knowledge, skill, experience, or training – making them an expert.

Difference from Old Evidence Act (if applicable)

The Bhartiya Sakshya Bill, 2023, largely retains the core principle of Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, regarding opinions of witnesses. However, the new Bill aims for greater clarity and precision in defining when expert opinions are admissible, aligning with modern evidentiary standards. The emphasis on ‘special knowledge’ is more pronounced.

Key Takeaways

• Witnesses should testify about facts, not opinions.
• Opinions are admissible only from qualified experts.
• Judges will exclude testimony that is purely speculative or based on assumptions.
• Focus on what the witness saw, heard, or did, not what they think happened.