Accomplice.
What this section does
An accomplice is a competent witness against an accused person. A conviction based on the testimony of an accomplice is not illegal merely because that testimony is uncorroborated, though corroboration is the established practice.
AI-generated plain-language summary. For the binding statutory text, see India Code (official).
The rule in one line
An accomplice is a competent witness and a conviction on his testimony alone is not illegal, though corroboration is prudent.
When it applies
- A co-conspirator who turns approver can testify against the other accused, and the court may convict on that testimony.
- A conviction based solely on an accomplice's evidence is legally valid, though courts as a matter of practice look for corroboration.
Practitioner note
Courts have consistently held (e.g., Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab) that while a conviction on uncorroborated accomplice testimony is not illegal, it is a rule of prudence to seek corroboration.
Derived from IEA s.133.
Read the official text
For the binding statutory text of BSA Section 138, refer to the Gazette of India or the India Code official website.
Why this matters
BSA Section 138 forms part of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam which replaced the Indian Evidence Act 1872 on 1 July 2024. Any new filing, FIR, charge sheet, or bail application made on or after that date should cite the new section number. References to the old act in legacy documents remain valid for matters that arose before the changeover.