Quality of evidence

Credibility and trustworthiness of a witness mandates to be tested with reference to the quality of his evidence which must be free from suspicion or distrust and must impress the court as natural, truthful and convincing.

Quality, and not the quantity of the evidence, was the rule; but non-production of most natural and material witnesses of the occurrence, would strongly lead to an inference of prosecutorial misconduct, which would not only be considered a source of undue advantage, but an act of suppression of material facts; causing prejudice to accused

Act of withholding of most natural and a material witness of the occurrence, would create an impression that the witness in question, if would have been brought in court, he might not have supported the prosecution

In such eventuality, the prosecution must not be in a position to avoid the consequence.

Quality and not the quantity of the evidence which would settle the guilt or innocence of accused; and conviction could be based on testimony of a single witness, even in a murder case.