Who is an expert and what is his main function?

 

Evidence Act: Who is an expert and what is his main function?

(Expert) Who are experts? And their work?

The general principle of the law of evidence is that :- 

"Every witness is a witness of fact , not of opinion ."

This means  that a person , who appears before a court as a witness , is entitled to state only those facts of which he has personal knowledge . is and that To state what his opinion is about those facts.

If  we  talk about  Indian Evidence Act, 1872 then

 Under this also the general rule is that:- 

  A  witness has been allowed to state either a relevant fact or a fact - in - issue , but what is his opinion of that fact , neither does the court care nor is the witness generally allowed to speak about it .

  Significantly, this principle of the Evidence Act this is applicable in both criminal and civil cases. 

  Obviously, the opinion of any person in a case other than a judge by whom the final judgment in that case is to be pronounced shall , as a rule , be considered , considered irrelevant to the decision of that case.

 

 However, there are exceptions to this principle as well, which we will explore further in this article.

 Normally , when a person is called in court to depose as a witness , he is expected to state facts only and not give his opinion . It is the job of the court to form an opinion in the matter . Further, if a person is called to give his evidence , it is expected that the person should be related to the case , not a third party .

 However, there are certain cases where the court finds itself unable to form an opinion or reach a decision . These are cases where the court or the judge is required to have a certain kind of knowledge or skill to form an opinion on a subject which, obviously, he does not possess.

 Let us understand this with an example,

  Suppose in some case a person dies. Now it cannot be independently determined by a judge as to what was the cause of the person's death. In such cases it becomes necessary for the court to take recourse to the opinion of an expert. .

 Such a requirement arises because such a case would require the specific experience , knowledge , skill and research of an expert , so that it could be ascertained as to what was the cause of death of a person. Obviously a doctor or autopsy or post mortem expert can tell better what is the cause of death of a person . And so, the help of such a person is taken by the court to find out what that person was. the cause of death of

Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

 Under Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the opinion of such persons/experts as may be considered relevant , having special skill in foreign law , or science , or art , in the field of recognition of any handwriting or fingerprints (and where the court has to form an opinion on all these matters).  

Section 45 says: -

45. Opinion of experts - When the Court has to form an opinion on any matter of foreign law or science or art or as to the uniqueness of handwriting or finger-prints, such foreign law , science or art or handwriting or in questions as to the uniqueness of fingerprints , the opinion of specially skilled persons is a relevant fact . person expert are called

It may be noted that only the opinion of a person having expertise in the above mentioned fields is considered as the opinion of an expert (as per section 45). These subjects are foreign law, science and art, inclusivity of handwriting and fingerprints.

Further, the opinion of the examiner of electronic evidence is also considered relevant under section 45A and such examiner is called an expert,  section 45A says:-

45Q - Section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000) when the court has to form an opinion in any proceedings on any matter relating to any information transmitted or stored in any computer resource or any other electronic or digital form The relevant facts are the opinion of the examiner of electronic evidence referred to in s.

It is to be kept in mind that Section 45 (and Section 45-Q), underlines the relevance and utility of an expert witness.

 In Ram Dass & Ors. v. Secretary of State & Ors. AIR 1930 All 587, it was held that the word " expert " has a special significance, and no witness is permitted to express his opinion unless unless he is an " expert" within the meaning of section 45, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 , or in certain cases, is permitted by any special law to express such opinion.

Under section 45 and section 45A of the Evidence Act , the opinion of experts becomes admissible when the court has to form an opinion on foreign law, or science, or art, or the uniqueness of handwriting or fingerprints, or electronic evidence , although Since such an opinion cannot be formed by the court on its own, as all these subjects demand a specific skill and adequate knowledge, the help of an expert is taken by the court.

As to who this expert shall be, the same section further provides that such expert shall be a special person to answer questions relating to foreign law, science or art, or handwriting, or uniqueness of fingerprints and electronic evidence (as per section 45A). Must be proficient. And if he has such skill and when he gives his opinion about these matters, then these points of opinion are relevant facts.

However, as stated  in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Jai Lal & Ors. (1999) 7 SCC 280  stated in , to accept the evidence of a witness as an expert, it is necessary to show that such person has acquired knowledge of the subject. has made a special study of the matter on which he is giving opinion or has acquired a special experience in that subject.

It should be kept in mind that no criteria have been fixed under this section as to what kind of people can be experts, so with the help of all the decisions mentioned in this article, we can decide that after all an expert Who will be called Let us understand about it in more depth.

Who would be called an expert?

An expert in any field of science, art or business is one who is experienced by his practice and observation. An expert actually means a person who is qualified to express an opinion because of his training or experience, whereas a lay witness is not competent to do so.

In the legal sense, an expert witness is one who has made special study, practice, or observation of the subject about which he or she is testifying. It is necessary that such a person should have special knowledge of that subject.

Therefore, in order to bring the evidence of a witness as that of an expert, it has to be shown that the person has made a special study of the subject, or acquired a special experience in it, or in other words that he knows the subject. Possesses appropriate skills and adequate knowledge.

Significantly, no formal qualification is necessary to qualify a witness as an expert (Section 45 and Section 45A do not even allude to this). For example, the Mysore High Court in  Abdul Rahman v. State of Mysore (1972) Cr. In LJ 407  , the opinion of a professional goldsmith was held to be relevant as an expert opinion for testing the purity of gold, although the goldsmith had no formal qualification, his only qualification being his experience.

In another case, the Principal of a school for deaf and dumb people was accepted as an expert for the purpose of certifying disability – Kishan  Singh v. N. Singh AIR 1953 P&H 373 .

specialist specialty

In Ramesh Chandra Agarwal v. Regency Hospitals Ltd. & Ors. (2009) 9 SCC 709 ), the  court had observed that the characteristic of an expert witness and his evidence is that he possesses reasonable skill in a subject unknown to the court.  The same point was also underlined in an earlier decision of the Supreme Court,  State of Himachal Pradesh v. Jai Lal & Ors. (1999) 7 SCC 280.

In view of the language of section 45 and section 45A, it is necessary that before a person can be characterized as an expert, it is necessary that there must be some material on record which can show that he is an expert in that field. He is an expert, and one who has proper skill in that particular field, and is well-versed in that subject. Such a person must have made a special study of that subject or gained special experience in it.

Thus before the testimony of an expert witness is admissible, his qualification as an expert must be shown, showing that he possesses the necessary qualifications in that subject or that he has acquired special skill in that field through his experience.

Work and Duties of Specialist

Lastly, as we have learned in this article, an expert is not a witness of fact. The character of his testimony/opinion is really that of an advisor. The prime duty of the expert witness is to assist the Judge with the scientific criteria necessary to test the correctness of the findings in a case, so that the facts proved by the evidence in that case are in accordance with this criteria to enable the Judge to make his independent decision. to be enabled –  Safi Mohammed v. State of Rajasthan AIR 2013 SC 2519.

The credibility of such a witness depends upon the reasons, data and materials cited in support of his findings, which form the basis of his findings. An expert does not have to act as judge or jury.

Similarly,  Titley v Alfred Robert Jones  it was held that the real function of an expert is to place before the court all the material, together with the reasons by which that expert used to come to a conclusion. has been induced, so that the court, which is not an expert, may take its own independent decision by perusing those materials.