व्यवहारमयूख (नीलकण्ठ भट्ट - पश्चिमी भारत की हिन्दू न्याय-संहिता एवं व्यवहार कोष)

42 VYAVAHĀRAMAYŪKHA [S. II. 3. 3-5. / N p. 78. l 24 p. 24. l. 13]
of uttara witnesses there must be three, four or five A single witness
alone would be enough for proof if he be a dūtaka (a messenger) an
accountant one employed in the business (by both parties as their inter-
mediary) the king or the presiding judge.
Yājñavalkya (II 72) declares tha even one witness of the likhita and other
sorts may be accepted (as sufficient for proof) if both sides consent
With the consent of both parties even a single person who knows the
dharma becomes (sufficient as) a witness.
Vyāsa says
Even one witness whose actions are pure who knows the dharma
whose word is known from experience (to be true) is enough for proof
(of a thing) especially in sāhasa (offences attended with force such as
murder robbery rape, &c)
Anubhūtavāk means one whose word is generally seen to be true
Kātyāyana says that one witness, even though not reputed to be a veracious
person is sufficient in cases of deposit and the like
Even a single person may depose as a witness in the case of a deposit
made secretly (in his presence), as regards things borrowed for use
even a single person sent by the plaintiff (i e the owner of the thing to
the borrower with the thing) may be (enough) as a witness.
Yācitam means ornaments nd the like such as ear-rings brought (from
the owner thereof) on the occasion of a marriage or the like The same
author (Kātyāyana) declares even one person sufficient as a witness in dis-
putes about articles for sale
That man by whom an article for sale was made (finished or manu-
factured) should identify it In a dispute (about that article) he though
alone (as a witness) is declared to be (sufficient) proof
And Vyāsa declares the qualifications of them (of witnesses)
Those who know the dharma persons having sons, persons born in
distinguished¹ families those who are well-bred those who (generally)
speak the truth, those who perform the rites prescribed in the Vedas and
the smṛtis, persons free from hatred and envy those who are śrotriyas
(learned in the Vedas) persons who do not depend upon others who are
learned who do not travel from place to place and those who are in the
prime of life should be made witnesses by the wise in disputes about debts
and the like
1 The word maulāḥ is rendered thus by the Kalpataru and the Vīramitrodaya
Madanaratna explains those who know the preceding circumstances of the transaction
in dispute) Medhātithi (on Manu 8. 62) explains maulāḥ also as those who are resident
of the same place as the parties
P 35 (text)