Competency of Witnesses & Accomplice Testimony

1. General Rule of Competency (Article 3)

• Core Principle: Article 3 describes the qualification/competency of a Witness.
• The Test for Competency: Any person is a Competent witness if they can understand the questions put to them and give rational answers to them.
• Disqualifications: A person is only incompetent if the court finds they cannot understand or answer rationally due to:
• Children: A child is a competent witness if they can understand the question and give rational answer.
• Dumb Persons (Article 4): A dumb person (unable to speak) is Competent to testify (e.g., by writing or signs in open court).

2. Exceptions to Competency (Perjury & Lunacy)

• Perjury Bar: A person is Incompetent to testify if they have been convicted by a court for Perjury, giving false evidence.
• The Exception to the Bar: A convicted perjurer becomes competent again only if the court is satisfied that he has repented and has mended his ways .
• Lunatics (Insane Persons): A lunatic is a Competent witness unless prevented by their lunacy from understanding the questions put to them and giving rational answers to them. They can testify perfectly during lucid intervals.

3. Accomplice Testimony (Article 16)

• Competency: An accomplice (a partner in crime) is a Competent witness against an accused person.
• The Absolute Exception: An accomplice is not a competent witness in cases involving offences punishable with Hadd.
• Legality of Conviction: A conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.