RAMRATAN AND OTHERS vs THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN

The Supreme Court held that under Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, it is not necessary for a witness to corroborate their testimony by stating in court that they had previously named the accused to another witness. The court clarified that as long as the witness provides evidence of some fact, their prior statement can be used for corroboration. The court distinguished this case from Mt. Misri v. Emperor and Nazar Singh v. The State, which were held as wrongly decided, and reaffirmed that a single witness's testimony can be sufficient depending on the circumstances.