Falsus in uno falsus in omnibus – It means false in one thing, false in everything.
Meaning
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is a Latin legal maxim which translates to:
“False in one thing, false in everything.”
Explanation:
The principle suggests that if a person lies about one fact, their credibility regarding all other statements may be doubted.
It is a rule of evidence rather than an absolute law.
Courts use it to assess the reliability of witnesses, especially when contradictions or deliberate falsehoods are found in their testimony.
Legal Principle
Rule of Evidence
If a witness deliberately lies on a material point, the court may disbelieve the entire testimony, particularly if the lie is significant.
It is based on the idea that a person who intentionally falsifies one part of their statement may not be trustworthy overall.
Limitations
The maxim is not absolute.
Modern courts may separate the falsehood from the truth, depending on context, importance of the lie, and corroboration.
A minor or immaterial falsehood does not automatically discredit the entire testimony.
Application in Law
Used primarily in criminal trials, but also in civil proceedings.
Courts examine:
Whether the falsehood is material or trivial.
Whether there is corroboration from other evidence.
The intent behind the false statement.
Indian Case Law
State of U.P. v. Rajesh Gautam (AIR 2003 SC 1540)
The Supreme Court held that minor contradictions in a dying declaration do not automatically discredit it.
Principle: Falsus in uno applies only when falsehood is material.
Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1984 SC 1622)
Court emphasized that material falsehood in testimony may affect credibility, but it is necessary to analyze carefully before rejecting the whole testimony.
N. Shankar v. State of Karnataka (AIR 1985 SC 1177)
Highlighted that a single untruth does not always mean falsus in omnibus; courts must weigh corroborative evidence.
External / Comparative Law
English Law:
Courts historically applied the maxim as a rule of thumb: a witness lying on a material fact could be disbelieved entirely.
Modern practice emphasizes partial discrediting rather than complete rejection.
US Law:
The maxim is applied cautiously. Judges instruct juries to consider the extent and materiality of false statements before dismissing all testimony.
Illustration
Example: A witness in a murder trial lies about where they were at a given time, but their testimony about the actual assault is corroborated by other evidence.
Modern courts may reject the lie but still accept the parts corroborated, instead of dismissing the entire testimony.
Summary
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Maxim | Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus |
| Meaning | False in one thing, false in everything |
| Legal Principle | Deliberate lie on a material point may discredit witness credibility |
| Limitations | Modern courts do not blindly reject the whole testimony; assess materiality and corroboration |
| Indian Cases | State of U.P. v. Rajesh Gautam, Sharad Sarda v. Maharashtra, N. Shankar v. Karnataka |
| International Law | English and US courts emphasize careful application, partial discrediting |
✅ Conclusion:
The maxim is a guideline for assessing witness credibility.
It stresses the importance of truthfulness, but modern law balances it with reasoned analysis and corroborative evidence.
Not all lies lead to the rejection of entire testimony — materiality is key.
RELATED Blog
0 comments