Himachal Pradesh High Court on Aged Witness & Secondary Evidence

The Himachal Pradesh High Court addressed whether secondary evidence can be admitted when the primary witness is elderly, frail, or otherwise incapable of testifying effectively. The Court held that age alone is not a bar to considering a witness’s testimony but acknowledged practical limitations of advanced age, memory lapses, and health conditions. It emphasised that courts must adopt a pragmatic approach that prioritises justice and truth while ensuring procedural fairness. On secondary evidence, the Court reiterated the rule that documentary secondary evidence can only be admitted when genuine and proven reasons exist for the unavailability of the primary document. The judgment discusses Section 65 of the Evidence Act in detail and clarifies that secondary evidence cannot become a substitute for laxity in preserving original documents. The ruling balances compassion for elderly witnesses with the legal requirement of maintaining evidentiary integrity. It also guides trial courts on how to evaluate credibility, corroboration, and reliability when dealing with aged witnesses in criminal as well as civil litigation.