In Brief
P. Ramesh appealed his conviction for murdering his wife. The trial court had rejected testimony from two child witnesses (aged 8 and 6) solely because they did not know the judge's identity, concluding they were incompetent. The High Court remanded the case to properly assess the children's competency to testify. The Supreme Court upheld the remand, holding that a child's competency depends on understanding questions and giving rational answers—not on knowing court personnel. The children here understood they were testifying about their mother's death, demonstrating necessary capacity. The Court reaffirmed that child witnesses, though vulnerable to influence, can provide reliable evidence after careful scrutiny and should be examined in child-friendly environments with full cross-examination rights for the accused.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.