Code: Section 138 BSA
An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person;
and a conviction is not illegal if it proceeds upon the corroborated testimony of an
accomplice.
Explanation of Section 138 BSA
Section 138 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023, addresses the legal standing of an accomplice as a witness in criminal proceedings.
This provision establishes two important principles:
-
An accomplice is considered a competent witness against an accused person.
-
A conviction based on the testimony of an accomplice is valid under law, provided that the testimony is corroborated.
The law recognizes that while an accomplice may have participated in the offense, their testimony can still serve as valuable evidence—especially when it is supported by independent corroboration.
This balances the need to consider relevant testimony with the necessity of safeguarding against potentially biased or self-serving statements by individuals who were involved in the crime.
Key Highlights
-
An accomplice can testify against a co-accused or another person involved in the same crime.
-
Their testimony is legally admissible and may lead to conviction.
-
However, courts generally require corroboration of such testimony for it to be relied upon.
Illustration
Example 1: Testimony of a Robbery Accomplice
In a case of armed robbery, one of the robbers turns approver and testifies against the other accused. Under Section 138, the court may consider the testimony valid and convict the co-accused—if the testimony is corroborated by other evidence such as CCTV footage or recovery of stolen goods.
Example 2: Drug Trafficking Case
An accomplice in a drug trafficking operation agrees to testify in exchange for leniency. The court treats the accomplice as a competent witness, but corroboration through intercepted communications and seizure of narcotics is required for the testimony to be sufficient for conviction.
Common Questions and Answers
Q1. Who is considered an accomplice?
An accomplice is someone who has participated in the commission of a crime—either directly or indirectly—but later provides testimony against another accused involved in the same offense.
Q2. Is the testimony of an accomplice alone enough for conviction?
While legally possible, courts generally exercise caution. A conviction based solely on an accomplice’s testimony is valid under Section 138, but the testimony must typically be corroborated by independent evidence.
Q3. Why is corroboration of an accomplice’s testimony important?
Accomplices may have motives such as reducing their own punishment or shifting blame. Corroboration helps ensure that the testimony is credible and reliable.
Q4. Can an accomplice testify voluntarily?
Yes. An accomplice can choose to testify either during investigation or trial, often as an approver under legal provisions in exchange for a lighter sentence or immunity.
Q5. Is an accomplice’s testimony treated differently than that of a regular witness?
Yes. While the law treats the accomplice as a competent witness, courts generally require that their statements be supported by additional evidence to avoid miscarriage of justice.
Conclusion
Section 138 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam plays a crucial role in criminal justice by allowing the testimony of accomplices to be used in court. While such witnesses may have been part of the crime, their insider perspective can be invaluable—provided their statements are corroborated by reliable evidence. This strikes a balance between utilizing all available evidence and safeguarding the rights of the accused.
For more in-depth legal resources and expert commentary, visit ApniLaw.
