In Indian criminal jurisprudence, the maxim 'falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus' (false in one thing,…

As held by the Supreme Court of India in cases such as Nisar Ali v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1957) and Gangadhar Behera v. State of Orissa (2002), the maxim "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" has not received general acceptance in India as a mandatory rule of law or rule of evidence, and serves merely as a rule of caution; the court must separate the grain of truth from the chaff of falsehood rather than reject the entire testimony of a witness merely because it is found to be untrue in some respect. Therefore, "Both a rule of caution and not applicable in India as a mandatory rule" is correct.