Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 255

EXPERT EVIDENCE
Ms. Shreya Jain
Ms. Ujaala Jain

Abstract
The law of evidence is very crucial branch of law on which justice
rests. The main object of evidence is to pave way for court to come
to a conclusion regarding the present case. In certain cases where
evidence is beyond the knowledge and skill of court, evidence
create problem for court to come to any conclusion. In such
situation court takes the help of expert evidence. Expert is a
person who has high knowledge and skill in particular field.
Evidence is information given by a person that proves the
allegation to be true or false. So expert evidence is information or
statement made by a person who is specialized in that particular
field of work or which he has given that information. Expert
evidence is required to assist the court when the case before it
involves matters on which court does not have the requisite
technical or specialist knowledge. Expert evidence is corroborative
and advisory in nature. It is not binding in all the cases. Opinion
on evidence given by witness is not compulsorily binding to court.
It wholly depends on the situational circumstances whether the
expert evidence and opinion given by expert witness is relevant or
not and what is its evidentiary value. Expert witnesses are
appointed by court in only those cases where court lacks in
knowledge about the case and if court feels it necessary for the
interest of justice. There are requisite rules to be followed by
experts in giving their expert report to the court and the court
may call upon the expert for testimony. Court does not rely on
this corroborative evidence but on primary evidences-documents
itself produced for the inspection of the court. Expert evidence is
given in both civil cases as well as in criminal cases. The present
case tries to analyze the evidentiary value of expert evidence, what
is relevant and not relevant evidence, cases to consider or discard
of expert evidence, binding nature of expert evidence and possible
changes which can be brought in the field of expert evidence for
the betterment of the ends of justices.


Student, LL.B (3 year) II Semester, Bharati Vidhyapeeth Deemed University,
Pune.

Student, M.Sc Forensic Science, Gujrata Forensic Sciences University,
Gandhinagar, Gujarat.

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 256

Key words: expert evidence, corroboration, opinion, testimony

Introduction
People often say that this person is an expert in a particular field
or work. People say this person is an expert speaker or that
person is an expert in particular field. In law, there may occur a
case concerning issues related to science or any other faculties
other than law. In such a case judge’s knowledge or skill may not
amount sufficient to give any opinion of his own or judge any
related evidence and give his judgment. An expert is called in
such cases who deliver his opinion, facts or evidence related to
such field in which he has extra-ordinary knowledge and skill.
Sections 45 – 55 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 talk about expert,
expert evidence and expert opinion.
Who’s an expert?
An expert is a person with high knowledge and skill in a
particular field of study, a person who has earned specialized
knowledge and skill in that particular field of study. Evidence is
information or opinion given by any person that proves the
allegation to be true or not to be true. So expert evidence is
information or opinion given by an expert in any field that person
is specialized in, which comes out to be evidence in any matter. In
field of law, expert witness is a person whose opinion is accepted
by judge relating to any fact or evidence. An expert witness giving
an opinion should be only on those matters in which that witness
has specialized skills. This opinion given by expert witness is
called expert opinion and if any evidence delivered by expert is
called expert evidence. Expert evidence is applied to both civil
cases and criminal cases. According to Section 45 of The Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 “When the Court has to form an opinion upon
a point of foreign law or of science or art, or as to identity of
handwriting [or finger impressions] 1, the opinions upon that point
of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, [or
in questions as to identification of handwriting]2, [or finger print
analysis]3 are relevant facts. Such persons are called experts” 4.

1 Inserted by Act 5 of 1899, S. 3. For discussion in Council as to whether

“finger impressions” include “thumb impressions,” GAZETTE OF INDIA, 1898,
Pt. VI, p.24.
2 Inserted by Act 18 of 1872, §.4.
3 Supra note 1.
4 The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, No. 1 of 1872, §.45.

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 257

Types of legal evidence

 Testimony evidence – The word testimony has been derived

from Latin word testis referred to disinterested third party
witness. In law, testimony is one of the forms of evidence
which is obtained when the witness makes any statement
or declares any fact. Testimony may be in any form,
written or oral. When written testimony is witnessed by
one or more persons who swear or affirm its authenticity
that testimony is admissible in court and is of more
reliability and validity. Whenever court asks questions to
witness, the answers given by witness to the court is called
testimony. It is a serious crime if witness gives false
information because before giving any statement witness
sworn under oath. After this if witness gives false answers,
witness commit the crime of perjury. According to section
118 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 any person may be called
to testify unless that person is prevented from
understanding the question of the court due to old age,
any disease and disease can be of body or mind, or
insanity of any person or any other cause of the same
kind. Person called to testify by court if refuses to answer a
question asked by court can be sent to jail for short
duration of period on ground find in contempt of court.

 Documentary evidence – Documentary is another form of

evidence. This is different from oral testimony.
Documentary evidence is in written form. It is any
document which is or can be introduced at a trial.
Documentary evidence may be an invoice, a contract, a
will, a photograph, a tape recording or film or an email,
spreadsheets, etc. for documentary evidence to be
admissible in court the witness must prove by other
evidence that it is genuine. Documents can be primary
evidence or secondary evidence. Primary evidence is the
original documents produced in the court whereas
secondary evidence is the copies of the documents of the
primary evidence.
Example: When the handwriting on document needs to be
identified then forensic experts match the handwriting on
document with the sample handwriting of certain person
and give their opinion as to the handwriting of both the
documents.

 Physical evidence – Physical evidence is also called real

evidence or material evidence. Any material object in the

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 258

matter which gives rise to the litigation, given as evidence

in any trial to prove a fact in issue based on object’s
physical characteristics is called physical evidence.
Explanation: Experts working or investigating in forensic
labs do study on material objects. When these experts give
their opinion about any fact relevant to case in court, court
may admit or deny the expert’s opinion. Whenever a doubt
is created or an expert is required with his physical
presence, the expert is called for its testimony in the court
of law.
An expert starts studying a legal court case only after an
expert has been appointed by the court if it feels any
necessity of expert evidence. An expert witness when gives
the expert evidence has to be a written report. The report
must further be given according to the rules provided in
provisions of the Act. Unless the interest of justice requires
an expert to be present in court, the court will not ask
expert to attend the trial.
Evidentiary value, consideration, binding force

 Opinion of medical experts

Medical evidence is only an evidence of opinion. It is only to
settle the matter and not so important. In case of Nilabati
Behra v. State5 that the opinion of a doctor is reliable if he held
the post-mortem examination and of Forensic Science
Laboratory. If any other expert doctor gave any contrary
opinion who gave cryptic report and based on its conjectures
should not be relied upon. In the case of Madan Gopal v. Naval
Dubey6 it was held that the medical opinion is just an opinion
and is not binding to the court. Opinion on technical aspects
and material data given by the medical experts is only
considered by court as advice and the court has to form its
own opinion.

 Conflicting opinion of two doctors

In case of T.P. Divetia v. State7 it was held that if there is any
confliction between the opinion of two doctors then the expert
opinion by the doctor who actually examined the injury and

5 Nilabati Behra v. State, AIR 1993 SC 1960: (1993) 2 SCC 746: 1993 Cr LJ
2899.
6 Madan Gopal v. Naval Dubey (1992) 3 SCC 204.
7 T.P. Divetia v. State, AIR 1997 SC 2193: 1997 Cr LJ 2535.

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 259

held the post-mortem must be considered and not of that

doctor who gave an opinion only on the basis of X-Ray report,
injury report or post-mortem report etc.

 Conflicting opinion between medical evidence and

direct evidence
In case of Prem v. Daula8 it was held that if there is confliction
between medical evidence and direct evidence given by eye
witnesses then direct evidence given by eye witnesses must be
preferred if its testimony is undoubted and not the opinion
evidence of the medical expert.

 Corroboration of dying declaration by medical evidence

In the case of State of U.P. v. Ram Sewak 9 it was held that it is
rare that description of incident and injury described in the
dying declaration gets full corroboration from the medical
evidenced contained in the injury report or the post-mortem
report.

 Certificate of doctor on plain piece of paper if to be

rejected
In case of Ammini v. State10 it was held that if the certificate of
doctor is given on a plain piece of paper and not on prescribed
form regarding the injury caused to accused person, it cannot
be rejected merely because it is on plain piece of paper and not
on prescribed form.

 Medical evidence as to age

In case of S.K. Belal v. State11 it was held that if medical
evidence shows her age between 17 to 18 years but on the
other side documentary evidence shows her age about 18
years, a victim girl cannot be proved minor. But in case of
Jagtar Singh v. State12 it was held that if birth certificate is
not reliable, the opinion of doctor should be relied upon
regarding the age of victim.

8 Prem v. Daula, AIR 1997 SC 719: (1997) 9 SCC 754: 1997 SCC (Cri) 754:
1997 Cr LJ 838.
9 State of U.P. v. Ram Sewak (2003) 2 SCC 161.
10 Ammini v. State, AIR 1998 SC 260: 1998 Cr LJ 481.
11 S.K. Belal v. State, 1994 Cr LJ 467 (Ori).
12 Jagtar Singh v. State, AIR 1993 SC 2448: 1993 Cr LJ 2886.

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 260

 Evidence of DNA expert

In case of Pantangi Balarama Venkata Ganesh v. State of A.P.13
it was held that “the evidence of DNA Expert is admissible in
evidence as it is a perfect science”.

 Opinion of ballistic expert

In the case of S.S. Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab 14 it was held
that if there is no ground not to believe the opinion of ballistic
expert, then the opinion of ballistic expert is reliable. Only
because there was delay in sending the pistol for obtaining
expert opinion as to whether it was in working condition, does
not make it unreliable when there is clear evidence of the
seizure of the weapon and there was no suggestion that the
pistol has been substituted. In case of Gundegowda v. State 15
it was held that ballistic expert report was admissible without
calling ballistic expert as witness. In case of Rchhpal Singh v.
State of Punjab16 it was held that the opinion of ballistic expert
is very importance in cases where injury is caused by fire
arms. In case of failure to produce such opinion report effects
the credit worthiness.

 Police officer when can be treated as ballistic expert

In case of Brij Pal v. State17 it was held that police personnel
must be treated as ballistic expert if he is having certificate of
technical competency and armour technical course and also
having long experience of inspection, examination, and testing
of fire arms and ammunition.

 Finger-print expert
In case of Keshavlal v. State of M.P.18 it was held that before
the seizure of the weapon of offence, if many people have
handled it then there will be no effect of non-examination of
the finger-print expert in any way.

13 Pantangi Balarama Venkata Ganesh v. State of A.P., 2003 Cr LJ 4508 (AP).

14 S.S. Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab, 1993 SCC (Cri) 1113: (1993) 3 (Supp)
SCC 738.
15 Mirdhe (1996). S.G. Gundegowda v. State Karnataka. Criminal Law
Journal, 852.
16 Hegde S. (2000). Rchhpal Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR SC 2710, AIR (All
India Reporter), SC (Supreme Court).
17 Brij Pal v. State (1996) 2 SCC 676: 1996 SCC (Cri) 392: 1996 Cr LJ 1677.
18 Keshavlal v. State of M.P., AIR 2002 SC 1221: (2002) 3 SCC 254: 2002 SCC
(Cri) 641.

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 261

 Handwriting expert
In case of Alamgir v. State (N.C.T. Delhi)19 it was held that
opinion of handwriting expert do not amount to conviction but
admittedly it can be relied upon when supported by other
items of internal and external evidence. In the case of Devi
Prasad v. State20, it was held that evidence given by a person
who has insufficient familiarity should be discarded. Indian
Evidence Act insists that documents either be proved by
primary evidence or by secondary evidence.

 Scientific expert
The scientific evidence given in court must be either based on
scientific theory or the hypothesis and such evidence is
expected to be empirical and properly documented in
accordance with scientific method such as is applicable to the
particular field of inquiry. It is a fact that scientific evidence is
demonstrative evidence unlike oral testimony, which depends
on the deposition of a witness. Scientific methods are used to
obtain scientific evidence. Evidence should be relevant and at
the same time worthy enough to become admissible in the
courts. An expert witness is called to testify about the
reliability of the scientific evidence sought to be introduced at
trial. In the case of Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab 21 the
footprint in blood near the dead body were compared with the
footprint of accused dipped in color ink. 9 and 10 similarities
were found by the experts in right and left foot respectively of
the accused with that blood footprint. Whereas 3
dissimilarities were also found that were explained due to
difference in density of blood and ink. It was held that
comparison test stood well and footprints in blood were of
accused.

 Opinion expressed in text books

In case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Sanjay Rai22 it was held
that opinions expressed in text books by specialist authors
may be of some importance for court in arriving the truth but
same cannot be treated as final or conclusive.

19 Alamgir v. State (N.C.T. Delhi) AIR 2003 SC 282: 2003 Cr LJ 456.

20 Beg M. (1967). Devi Prasad and Ors. v. State, on 10 September, 1964.
1967, Criminal Law Journal, 64, 134, AIR (All India Reporter).
21 Bhagwati (1956). Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab, SC 415, CriLJ 805, AIR
(All India Reporter), SC (Supreme Court).
22 State of Madhya Pradesh v. Sanjay Rai, AIR 2004 SC 2174.

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 262

Admissibility of expert evidence

Expert opinion is admissible only when an expert is examined as
a witness in a court. Unless the expert gives an appropriate
reason for his opinion and being tested during the cross-
examination of opponent party, an expert opinion cannot be
admissible. Law has stated various provisions for the examination
of experts. According to section 293 of CrPC the report of
Government scientific experts provided under this section will be
held admissible as evidence in inquiry, trial or other proceedings
of the court, if the court can summon or examine the experts. If
court feels any need to call upon the expert to examine as to
subject matter of his report, the court can summon such expert.
Further this section states that when court summons such expert
and that expert is not able to attend personally, such expert can
send his responsible working officer on his behalf who is well
versed with the examination done by such expert.
Opinion when relevant/when not relevant

 Facts bearing upon opinion of expert

Section 46 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that when an
expert makes any opinion about the evidence which is relevant
then the facts given by expert are relevant which they
supports or are inconsistent with the opinion of expert.
Illustration: If we need to know whether A is intoxicated by a
certain poison, the fact that A exhibits any symptoms which
experts affirm or deny being the symptoms of that poison, is
relevant.

 Opinion as to handwriting, when relevant

Section 47 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that “When the
Court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom any
document was written or signed, the opinion of any person
acquainted with the handwriting of the person by whom it is
supposed to be written or signed that it was or was not written
or signed by that person, is a relevant fact”23.

 Opinion as to electronic signature24, where relevant

Section 47A of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that: “When
the Court has to form an opinion as to the [electronic

23 Supra note 4, §. 47.

24 Substituted by Act 10 of 2009, S. 52 for “digital signature” (w.r.e.f. 27-10-
2009).

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 263

signature]25 of any person, the opinion of the Certifying

Authority which has issued the [Electronic Signature
Certificate]26 is a relevant fact.]”.27

 Opinion as to existence of right or custom, when

relevant
Section 48 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that: “When
the Court has to form an opinion as to the existence of any
general custom or right, the opinions, as to the existence of
such custom or right, of persons who would be likely to know
of its existence if it existed, are relevant”.28

 Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant

Section 49 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that: “When
the Court has to form an opinion as to— the usages and
tenets of any body of men or family, the constitution and
government of any religious or charitable foundation, or the
meaning of words or terms used in particular districts or by
particular classes of people, the opinions of persons having
special means of knowledge can be relevant facts”.29

 Opinion on relationship, when relevant

Section 50 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that: “When
the Court has to form an opinion as to the relationship of one
person to another, the opinion, expressed by conduct, as to
the existence of such relationship, or any person who, as a
member of the family or otherwise, has special means of
knowledge on the subject, is a relevant fact: given that such
opinion shall not be sufficient to prove a marriage in
proceedings under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (4 of 1869) or
in prosecutions under section 494, 495, 497 or 498 of the
Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)”.30

 Grounds of opinion, when relevant

Section 51 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that:
“Whenever the opinion of any living body or living person is

25 Substituted by Act 10 of 2009, S. 52 for “digital signature” (w.r.e.f. 27-10-

2009).
26 Substituted by Act 10 of 2009, S. 52 for “digital signature certificate”
(w.r.e.f. 27-10-2009).
27 Supra note 4, §. 47-A.
28 Supra note 4, §. 48.
29 Supra note 4, §. 49.
30 Supra note 4, §. 50.

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 264

relevant, the grounds on which such opinion is based are also

relevant. Illustration An expert may give an account of
experiments performed by him for the purpose of forming his
opinion”.31

 In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed,

irrelevant
Section 52 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that: “In civil
cases, the fact that the character of any person concerned is
such as to render probable or improbable any conduct
imputed to him, is irrelevant, except in so far as such
character appears from facts otherwise relevant”.32

 In criminal cases, previous good character relevant

Section 53 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that: “In
criminal proceedings, the fact that the person accused is of a
good character, is relevant”.33

 Evidence of character or previous sexual experience

not relevant in certain cases
Section 53-A of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that: “In a
prosecution for an offence under section 354, section 354-A,
section 354-B, section 354-C, section 354-D, section 276-A,
section 376-B, section 376-C, section 376-D, section 376-E of
Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or for attempt to commit any
such offence, where the question of consent is in issue,
evidence of the character of the of such person or victim’s
previous sexual experience with any person shall not be
relevant on the issue of such consent or the quality of
consent”34.35

 Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply

Section 54 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that: “In
criminal proceedings the fact that the accused person has a
bad character is irrelevant, unless evidence has been given

31 Supra note 4, §. 51.

32 Supra note 4, §. 52.
33 Supra note 4, §. 53.
34 Supra note 4, §. 53-A.
35 Inserted by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 (13 of 2013), §. 25
(w.r.e.f. 3-2-2013).

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 265

that he has a good character, in such case it becomes

relevant”.36

 Character as affecting damages

Section 55 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that: “In civil
cases, the fact that the character of any person is such as to
affect the amount of damages which he ought to receive is
relevant”.37
Literature review
Doris Well wrote an article on ‘testifying in court as a forensic
expert stating the role of a forensic expert’. He focused on the
procedure followed by the expert starting from the laboratory and
ending at the court for the expert testimony. 38
Cutler, Findley and Loney researched on the expert testimony on
interrogation and false confession, and described about how the
experts in particular field can know about the false confessions
which also helps the jury. They focused on importance of
admissibility of expert testimony as the confession evidence is
important and false confessions can disturb the conclusion. 39
Clifford worked on the expert witness focusing on the U.S. rules
related to them. It stated the worth of expert testimony by
discussing the history of various rules or procedures used by U.S.
legal system to control the quality of the expert testimony. 40
Tay studied the role of forensic expert in court and discussed
about the working of the forensic experts in laboratories, at crime
scene and hoe they can testify in the court depending on their
examination.41
Researcher’s Club studied about the importance of forensic
science in law and demanded the establishment of independent
forensic science laboratories for early results and experts with

36 Supra note 4, §. 54.

37 Supra note 4, §. 55.
38 Doris Well, Testifying in Court as a Forensic Expert, 269 NIJ JOURNAL, Mar
2012.
39 Brain L. Cutler, Keith A. Findley, Danielle Loney, Expert Testimony on
Interrogation and False Confession, 82(3) UMKC LAW REVIEW, May 2014.
40 W.K. Clifford, Historical and Practical Considerations Regarding Expert
Testimony, 15 HARVARD LAW REVIEW 54, 40-58, 1901.
41 Michael Tay, The Role of Forensic Expert in Court, Conference: Asian
Forensic Sciences Network Third Annual Meeting and Symposium, May
2011.

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 266

police officials for proper management of the crime scene in

India.42
Cresswell summarized all the roles and duties of an forensic
expert. It explains about the procedures of examinations, report
making, ethic to be followed and the court testimony if required. 43
Swann stated about the roles and duties of the expert witness as
how can an expert’s opinion change the jury’s decision. An expert
must show all the examinations and also refer the judge for
second opinion.44
Clews summarized the importance of expert evidence. It tells
about the responsibilities of an expert witness.45
Conclusion
Thus, we may conclude that court appoints expert evidence
mainly in cases of science and trade where a person with high
knowledge is allowed to give his opinion in evidence and facts.
They are also called upon to testify to facts and details leading to
that opinion. A witness providing expert evidence must be
competent to provide evidence in the court case. Any person who
is prevented from understanding the nature of question asked by
court is competent to give opinion in evidence and facts. As
mentioned above that mainly opinion in evidence is taken in field
of medicine that is related to death of a person, time of death, age
of person dead, kind and nature of weapon used to cause injury,
reason of injury and mental state of parties, etc. In case of DNA
test, the opinion of person who has specialized skill in that field is
taken to determine the legitimacy of a child in family law cases. In
the case of Krishan Chand v. Sita Ram46 it was held that where
there is conflict in expert opinion the court has the power to make
its own opinion with regard to signature on a document. It
completely depends upon the facts and circumstances and
opinion of court. There is no provision mention in Indian Evidence
Act, 1872 that expert evidence is corroborative in nature. Usually
unless expert evidence is supported by other evidence court does
not rely on such expert evidence. Because of this reason Supreme

42 RESEARCHER’S CLUB, https://researchersclub.wordpress.com/2014/08/09/

importance-of-forensic-science-in-law-a-study-3/.
43 Cresswell. J, The Duties of Experts, IKARIAN REEFER 1993 2 LILR 68, 81-82.
44 Alice Swann, The Roles and Duties of the Expert Witness, 8 CHILD CARE IN
PRACTICE, 305-311, 2002.
45 G.D. Clews, Responsibilities of an Expert Witness, BARRISTER, 2004.
46 Kumar M. (2005). Krishan Chand v. Sita Ram, AIR P & H 156, All India
Reporter, Punjab & Haryana High Court.

Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com

Bharati Law Review, April – June, 2018 267

Court of India has observed that it is highly unsafe to convict a

person only on the basis of sole testimony of expert. A Jury is not
bound to entertain the opinion. Jury may accept or reject the
opinion or beliefs of witnesses.
Some of the possible changes according to me that can address
the lacunae are:

 In many cases, it’s just the expert who gives an

independent opinion due to which it is corroborative
evidence. There should be more equipment or instruments
that can be helpful for more reliable conclusions by an
expert.

 More on field experts should be there. Every investigation

starts from the crime scene, if not handled or taken care of
properly the evidentiary value or things might lose. In
India police lack in proper management of the crime scene,
so more forensic experts on field should be appointed.

 Every expert makes an opinion on the basis of evidence

received in the laboratory and the information provided by
the investigating officer. To improve the quality of reports
the expert should himself collect the data and evidences
instead of relying on the information provided by others.

 An expert when called to the court for testimony, the

expert handling the case should himself go for the same.
No alternative person can give better explanation than the
expert himself who gave the opinion.

 More independent forensic science laboratories should be

there so that the cases pending due to the delay in
government forensic science laboratories are solved as
early as possible.

 Even the already established forensic science laboratories

should be well equipped and maintained so that the report
formed is more accurate and reliable.
So, it is appropriate to consider the opinion of experts but relying
on expert’s opinion is a weak form of evidence, mainly in those
cases where sufficiency of knowledge is doubtful.



Published in Articles section of www.manupatra.com