In Criminal proceedings the statement of a witness's age forms no part of his deposition and is not usually the statement of the witness himself but an estimate of the Court
In 1925 however she deposed that her son died at the age of 17 and if this is true, then plaintiff was 18 years old when the written statement was filed and had not been born in 1899 at the time when she now states that he and Rambhulawan separated and partitioned the ancestral properties. The plaintiff himself asserts that he was 20 years old at the time the suit was instituted and examined a doctor, P.W. No. 1, whose opinion supports the plaintiff on this point. The only criticism of this evidence is that the plaintiff's deposition in the proceedings under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, states his age as 26 in 1926. In Criminal proceedings the statement of a witness's age forms no part of hisdeposition and is not usually the statement of the witness himself but an estimate of the Court. I therefore see no reason for not accepting the evidence ofthe plaintiff and the opinion of the doctor that the former was about of when the present suit was instituted and we find accordingly.
Patna High Court
Ramgahan Missir vs Musammat Ramdasi Kuar And Ors. on 24 August, 1933
Equivalent citations: 148 Ind Cas 413
