astonishing amount of perjury in courts of law

"The astonishing amount of perjury in courts of law is a
sad commentary on human veracity. In spite of the oath,
more untruths are probably uttered in court than
anywhere else. This deviation from veracity ranges from
mere exaggeration all the way to vicious perjury. Much of
this untrue testimony grows directly out of human
nature under unusual stress and is not an accurate
measure of truth-speaking general. In order to shield a
friend or help one to win in what is thought to be a just
cause, or because of sympathy for one in trouble, many
members of the frail human family are inclined to violate
the truth in a court of law as they will not do elsewhere."
In the words of Osborn (The problem of proof - Albert S.
Osborn, PP 22, 23, New York, Matthew Bender and Co.
1926 - quoted in (2) ibid, P.226).

The above stated nature of human beings makes the task of the functionaries in
Disciplinary Proceedings all the more challenging. Culling out truth from the
conflicting statements of the contesting parties is perhaps the most challenging part
of the assignment of the Disciplinary Authority and the Inquiring Authority. This
complex process is known as evaluation of evidence.
Evaluation of evidence is perhaps the most complex and challenging area in the
gamut of activities during departmental proceedings. Skill in evaluation of evidence is
required to be possessed by almost all the functionaries. Presenting Officer is
required to evaluate evidence and present his version in the brief of the PO. Inquiring
Authority is required to evaluate evidence to arrive at the conclusion as to whether
the charges are proved. Disciplinary Authority is required to make first hand
appraisal of evidence and take a view as to whether the Inquiring Authority’s
"The astonishing amount of perjury in courts of law is a
sad commentary on human veracity. In spite of the oath,
more untruths are probably uttered in court than
anywhere else. This deviation from veracity ranges from
mere exaggeration all the way to vicious perjury. Much of
this untrue testimony grows directly out of human
nature under unusual stress and is not an accurate
measure of truth-speaking general. In order to shield a
friend or help one to win in what is thought to be a just
cause, or because of sympathy for one in trouble, many
members of the frail human family are inclined to violate
the truth in a court of law as they will not do elsewhere."
In the words of Osborn (The problem of proof - Albert S.
Osborn, PP 22, 23, New York, Matthew Bender and Co.
1926 - quoted in (2) ibid, P.226).

133
conclusion are acceptable. Appellate Authority is also required to perform the above
function.
Although skill can be developed through exercises, case studies, etc. in this chapter
an attempt is being made to provide the underpinning knowledge necessary for
evaluation of evidence.