Bombay High Court Says Child's 'Memorized' Statement Does Not Automatically Prove Tutoring

The Bombay High Court held that a child victim's statement that she had memorized material read to her by police does not automatically establish tutoring.

Background and legal issue

The evidentiary question must be assessed from the testimony as a whole, including whether the witness remained consistent and withstood cross-examination on material facts A single expression used by a child cannot mechanically discredit otherwise reliable evidence The ruling does not remove the court's duty to scrutinise child testimony carefully or ignore genuine indications of coaching

Reasoning and significance

It rejects an automatic inference and requires trial courts to evaluate reliability contextually, with sensitivity to the manner in which children understand and describe preparation.

The legal effect is confined to the operative ruling or procedural development. Allegations and party submissions are not treated as established facts unless the court expressly decided them.