Answer
In legal proceedings, witnesses are generally categorized
into two types: witnesses of fact and expert witnesses. A witness of fact, or
lay witness, provides testimony based on personal observations or experiences
directly related to the case. In contrast, an expert witness offers opinions
based on specialized knowledge, skills, or experience in a particular field, aiding
the court in understanding complex matters beyond common knowledge.
Distinctions between Witness of
Facts and an Expert Witness
|
Aspect |
Witness of
Facts |
Expert
Witness |
|
Basis of
Testimony |
Personal
observations or experiences. |
Specialized
knowledge, training, or experience. |
|
Nature of
Testimony |
Factual
recounting without personal opinions. |
Professional
opinions and inferences within their expertise. |
|
Purpose |
Establishes
what happened based on firsthand knowledge. |
Assists the
court in understanding technical or specialized aspects of the case. |
|
Scope of
Evidence |
Limited to
direct sensory perceptions. |
Can include
interpretations, analyses, and conclusions drawn from specialized knowledge. |
Case Law
The Supreme Court, in Prem Sagar Manocha v. State (NCT
of Delhi), elaborated on the distinction between these two types of
witnesses. The Court emphasized that a witness of fact presents facts as they
are, without providing opinions, whereas an expert witness furnishes the court
with their opinion, the reasons for it, and all supporting materials.
0 Comments