Professional Documents
Culture Documents
WITNESSES
The Witnesses Are The Most Important And Play Vital Role In Both Civil And Criminal Proceeding .The Judicial Action Is Based On Deposition
Of Witnesses
Sec 118 –Competency Of Witnesses
Sec 119- Competency Of Dumb Witness
Sec 120- Competency About The Parties To Civil Suit ,And Their Wives Or Husbands –Husband Or Wife Of Person Under Criminal Trial
Sec 121- Privileges Available To A Judge Or Magistrate , Who Shall Not Be Compelled To Give His Evidence , Except Upon A Special Order Of
Some Court .
Sec 122-Privilleges Available To A Spouse Giving About Communication During Marriage.
Sec 123-Privilleges Available To The State Regarding Evidence As To Affairs Of State
Sec 124-Privilleges Available To Official Communication.
Sec 125- Privilleges Available To Magistrate And Police Officers Regarding ‘ Information As To Communication Of Offence’
Sec 126& Sec 127-Privilleges Available In Professional Communication
Sec 128- Privillege Not Waived By Volunteering Evidence
Sec 129- Privillege To The Confidential Communication With Legal Advisers
Sec 130- Production Of Title Deeds Of Witness Not A Party
Sec 131- Production Of Documents Or Electronic Records Which Another Person Having Possession Could Refuse To Produce
Sec 132-Witness Not Excused From Answering On The Ground That Answer Will Criminate
Sec 133-The Evidence Of Accomplice.
Sec 134-Number Of Witness
Dangerous witnesses due to their tender ages –they forget easily what they have seen or heard .They may be easily induced or
threatened or influenced
Their evidence should be scrutinized with utmost care and caution..It is always safe to have corroborated evidence .In case of rape
where the victim is a child of tender age ,the law does not require the corroboration ,cozchild don’t have motive on accussed to incriminate
falsely . If the court finds such evidence to be reliable and untainted , it may lay conviction without seeking for corroboration..If there is
discrepanicies in statement of a child witness it may be merely considered as well taught lesson and there is innocence or failure to understand
by the child.
If court find a person incompetent to give the evidence ,it must record the reasons for it .There must be strict proof of incapacity .
Though this is not necessary to make child’s testimony admissible ,such thing is essential for the court to assess the mental capacity
of the child witness .The preliminary examination is essential as it has merit of having the child witness in the hands of court for it to discover
by asking questions which have no relevance or connection with the facts about which that witness was expected to give evidence , so that evil
effect of torturing could not mark the assessment of the mental capacity of the witness by the court .
In case of court of Appeal the judge can arrive at a conclusion of competency by asking the child someother question and answers
preserved on by the Trial Court judge.
Privilleged Witness
A child witness is aprivilleged witness .The court may allow such witness without administering oath .(Under sec 5 of the oath act 1873
provide witness must be examined on oath or affirmation .sec 13 of same act provides irregularity in oath/aff shall not invalidate any
proceeding or render any evidence inadmissible.)
1. China Venkadu Vs. Emperor - Not administering oath.-coz of age and immaturity of child
2. Queen Vs.Dhani Ram
Deliberate omission to administer the oath by child witness would not make the evidence of such witness inadmissible
C. Competency of Diseased
A leper is a competent witness even though his body is diseased he can understand the question and give rational answers.
F. Competency Of Dumb Persons –Sec 119 ; This Sec Equally Applies To Deaf Person
They are competent to give evidence , if they are able to understand the questions asked and give rational answers.Thus this sec
provides that such witness can give answer in any other intelligible manner –such as by writing in written or by signs made in the open
court .Evidence so given shall be deemed to be oral evidence. He need not be dumb by birth but dumb at any stage .
(science of sign, language of dumb ,appliances of hearing aids ,spl tv programme for dumb)
In England signs made by dumb person may be translated by an interpreter but in India it is not accepted .
2. Queen Vs.Abdulla
Prostitue Dulhari deceased by act of Abdullah who out of dispute cut the throat with razor resulting in cut of anterior wall of gullet and
windpipe .She couldn’t speak there after and before she died gave dying declaration by means of affirmative or negative signs and gestures
,TC convicted the accused whereas the accused inappeal object that gestures and sign could not be taken as statement under sec 32(1).The full
bench of Allahabad H.C up held decision of TC and regarded sign+gesture=oral statement overruling objection.
3. Venkatsan Vs.Emperor
Madras H.C held that If the lunatic unable to understand and answer the questions at lucid interval he is incapable as a witness to be admitted.
4. Shambhu dutt shatri Vs. State of Rajasthan ; Ramprasad Vs.Hari Narain –Rule 3 of Order III Of CPC.-No P.O.A to act as witness on
party’s behalf
Rajasthan high court held that with general power of attorney holder can appear ,plead and act on behalf of party but cnt enter witness box on
behalf .He has to appear in his own capacity.
5. Lakhan Singh Vs.Emperor
Unable to speak becoz of the religious vow that has been take .Thus the person allowed to give answers in hand writing as per sec 119
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 120- Competency About The Parties To Civil Suit ,And Their Wives Or Husbands –Husband Or Wife Of Person Under
Criminal Trial
In civil proceeding the parties to the suit and husband or wife of any party to the suit shall be competent witnesses.In criminal
proceedings against any person , the husband or wife of such person shall be competent witness
Acc to sec 120 wife and husband are competent witnesses for and against the other – confines to the interest of spouses only .
Evidence against spouse –wife filing mainainence case give aginst give aginst her husband &husband for restitution of conjugal rights
against wife.
Evidence in fav of spouse- suit for recovery of money –if wife is witness of the pro.note.she can give evidence in fav of husband.
-gift deed executed by wife – husband attest and give evidence in fav when required.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Privilleged Communication
Privillege-right,advantage or immunity belonging to a person ,class or office
The privilege of witness means the right of witness to withhold evidence to disclose certain matters .The communications that
cannot be compelled to be disclosed are described as Previlleged communications
Principle : Privillege Of Witness – on grounds of convenience and public policy .
Privillege Of Witness: form sec 121-131,+other sec
Eg :prosecution wish to examine Accused made incriminating communication to the ex-wife, priest , lawyer inrelationto trial –give object and
reason for it
exwife: under communication during marriage(sec 122)
Priest:not privileged so comes under confession i.e extra judicial confession .
Lawyer:Professional communication (sec 126)
Sec 121 :No judge or magistrate exept upon the special order of the court to which he is subordianate be compelled to answer as to his own
conduct in court as such judge or magistrate , or as to anything which came to his knowledge in court as such judge or magistrate ,but he may
be examined as to other matters which occurred in his presence whilst he was so acting .
Privillege given to the judge or magistrate of trial court whom being compelled to give evidence in certain matters .
Improper deposition taken –cant ask –privillege given
False evidence given - cant ask –privillege given
Murder of police while on trial before him –examined as what occurred.-no privilege given –in this judge supposed to give evidence
eyewitness not as judge/ magistrate.
Importance :if no privillge given a large number o fcases will be filed against judge /magistrateswhich hinder the judicial proceedings
This is a privilege section given to the spouses only i.e to husband and wife from disclosing any communication made during
marriage and it extend to the interest of 3rd person .
This privillege is given to communication only and not to the conduct of spouse .Therefore wife or husband may give evidence against
the conduct of other party in criminal proceeding.
Communication made duringmarriage life only .A communication made before marriage is not protected .The communication
/privilege continues even after marriage not dissolved by death /divorce.
Exception –If there is suit /proceeding between the spouse –where one of spouse prosecuted for any crime such as bigamy ,
adultery ,matrimonial cruelty against another .
Eg :I will kill him –said by husband :this is communication therefore wife cannot depose b4 court –Its privilege for any communication
Husband with knife enter opp .house :this is conduct : therefore wife can depose b4 court-Therefore no protection under sec.
If one spouse made communication to other party gives consent :therefore the other spouse may be permitted to depose
In case of communication by other means : therefore the other spouse may be permitted to depose - Therefore no protection under sec.
Eg: ‘Im going to X house and bring jewls from his house and give them to you’—this is communication which is protected
After that he came back with jewels and blood stained clothes –this is conduct –this is not protected.
Object : Salus Populi est Suprema Lex –public welfare is the highest law
This privilege is granted to state to protect the interest of the public.Enactment of official secrets act 1923 by british govt along with
these two sec –the state govt was empowered to veil any of its act from being published and also acted as suppression of people’s voice and
rights &put them in darknes s.
Since independence N.G.O, press ,jurist ,h.r.assn have been struggling for freedom of information.SC has held that freedom of speech
under article 19(1)(a) also include freedom of information .though freedom of information act 2002 enacted the sec 123 &124 are not amended
or repealed .
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 124-Privilleges Available To Official Communication
Sec 124-No public officer shall be compelled to disclose communications made to him in official confidence, when he considers that the
public interest would be suffered by the disclosure.
To the satisfaction of the court:There should be a real reason given by the head of the department refusing the production and
disclosure of document.Merely saying that it would injure public interest /prejudicial to public interest are not sufficicent .There
should be real danger of some injury being caused to the public at large.
Chadalavada Subba Rao Vs.Kasu BRAHMnanda Reddy &ors
A.P.HCheld that tribunal is not right in holding that provision of sec 123 &124 will apply and govern the trial of election petition.
Menaka Gandhi Vs.U.O.I
under passport authority Act 1972 her passport was impounded by passport authorities .When questioned by her they replied that in
public interest .and no reason stated .The supreme court gave statement in fav of her that Prin of natural justice , Audi Alteram Partem was
not followed .but simply tried to avoid in pretext of public interest
R.K.Jain Vs.U.O.I
SC laid down following principles relating to privileged state document Under sec 123, 124 ,162
i. Not claimed by mere administrative routine
ii. Doc relate to affairs of state &disclosure against the interest of public.
iii. Public interest must be strong –outweigh pvt /other interest
iv. Affidavit by minister –precisly statingthe reasons and grounds for claiming immunity
v. Court slow in questioning opinion of minister given in affidavit
vi. Addl.affidavit /cross exam-seek by court of minister
vii. Examine document in camera
viii. Weigh –competing claims of pub.interest immunity from disclosure and public interest of doing justice to the litigating parties in
light of doc.
S.P.Gupta Vs.U.O.I –Fazil Ali .J –SC : Balance B/W right to know and privileged state document
The provison of sec 123,124, 162, article 74(2) would show that legislature has incorporated a direct prohibition against the use of doc
mentioned in aforesaid provisions.Therefore disclosure has to be made in exceptional caircumstances.In fact those provisions clearly
contain 4 impotant attributes of doctrine of disclosure
Public interest
Confidentiality
Candour
Expediency
The doctrine of candour /confidentiality propounded by u.s.supreme court does not apply here in India .Nether the rule of protection against
self incrimination as prevalent in uk/usa accepted in India .
Thus it can be safely concluded that the stautory provisions of sec 123 &124 + article 74(2) have fully safeguarded high government and
officical secrets and disclosure is prohibited in public interest unless the court is satisfied that disclosure wil not harm the public interest.
1. Maintain all its records in such manner and form as is consistent with operational requirement duly cataloged and indexed
2. Publish at such intervals following as may be prescribed by appropriate authority .
a. Org fn and duties
b. Officer and employees power and procedure followed by them in decision making process.
c. Norms set by public authority in discharge of its function
d. Rules,regulation ,instructions, manuals &other categories of rec used by employees for discharging its fn
e. Details /facilities available to citizen for obtaining info
f. Name ,designation and other particular of the public info officer
3. Relavant facts –publish imp decisions and policies that affect the public –while announcing such decision and policies
4. Reason for decision –admin /quasi judicial to those affected by such decision
5. Publish project /communicate generally –to public or person to be affected before initiating such
Non appln of act to certain organization –list of such organization given in schedule of the act .(19 in total )
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 125- Privilleges Available To Magistrate And Police Officers Regarding ‘ Information As To Communication Of Offence’
Sec 125: No magistrate /police officer /revenue officer shall be compelled to say whence he got any information as to the commission of
any offence , rev.off-against public revenue.
Privillege given to 3 authorities –refuse to disclose the source of information but not to the document
Safety to informant –This section is intended to give safety to the informant ,particularly to the information.Thus
the privilege is more
particularly to the informant than magistrate /police officer /revenue officer .
Reason - Gives info about crl or revenue offences.
- Help in protecting the revenue of the state; help police in detecting and arrest the accussed.
- Such informant threatened by wrong doer eg. Several Instances where naxals killed the police informant.
- Fear of people to approach police station / court –rude behaviour , expenses ,delayaed cases,long standing .
-Speedy decision ,immediate reaction , public safety
Police officer –don’t disclose the informant , but disclose arrestee and grounds of arrest
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 126,127,128,129-protection of client
Sec 126-Privilleges Available In Professional Communication
Sec 126: No barrister ,attorney ,pleader or vakil shall at any time be permitted unless with his client consent
1. To disclose any communication made to him in course and for the purpose of his employment as such barrister ,pleader ,attorney
or vakil ,by or on behalf of the client (or)
2. To state the contents /conditions of any document with which he became acquainted in the course and purpose of his
professional employment. (or)
3. To disclose any advice given by him to his client in the course and for purpose of such employment
Diff classes of legal practitioners before Advocates Act 1961.Now only one i.e. Advocates
This is for the protection of the client and not legal practitioners
Exception –disclosure of information by advocates only when express consent or permission given by the client
- If more than one client for a case ,disclosure with consent of all of them .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 127: It is a proviso and extension to sec 126 .This section is extended to interpreters and clerks of advocates
It is impossible to conduct the legal business without professional assistance ,such assistance should be effectual ,provide for full and
unreserved intercourse between client and advocates.
Thing observed –Not only thecommunication made by client to advocate but also the things observed by the advocate.
Letters –under these 2 secs letter written by client to advocate /vice versa protected .
Notice –issued under course an purpose of his employment and therefore protected
Advice- under these 2 secs protection extended even to advice given by advocate to the client.
Consent –no disclosure of info unless client consent for the same
Evidence of an advocate- advocate engaged by the client shall not be compelled to give evidence on behalf of the opposite party.
Privillege only to legal advisor(advocate) – incourse and purpose of employment .obligation continues even after ceasation of employment.
Communication tointerpreter /clerk –Acc to sec 127 such interpreter /clerk under advocate not at liberty to disclose information when a
communication is made to them .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If one of the party tosuit ask witness of opp party to produce his title deeds its unnecessary cause annoyance and humiliation to
witness and there by lead the witness to be party to the suit without any issue .It cause time of court tobe wasted.
Thus privilege given to witness title deed is. To the documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 131- Production Of Documents Or Electronic Records Which Another Person Having Possession Could Refuse To Produce
Foundation of sec 131 –DELEGATUS NON POTEST DELEGARE (A delegate cannot delegate)
Sec 131-No one(3RD PARTY ) shall be compelled to produce the documents(or electronic record) in his possession ,under his control ,which any
other person would be entitled to refuse to produce if they were in his possession
-unless the last mentioned person consents to their production
Prahalad Gangadhar Joshi Vs.Mst .Sakhabai W/o Prahalad Joshi
No employee of a company can produce document of a company without the consent of company even if order is passed by the court to
employee to produce company document .Even under sec 94 of Cr.P.C the court is not entitled to issue summons against comapany’s
employee to submit documents of the company
.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 132-Witness Not Excused From Answering On The Ground That Answer Will Criminate
Criminate – to criminate ;
Incriminate –to charge with crime ;
Incriminatory –Tending to show that a crime has been committed .
Sec 132 – A witness shall not be excused from answering any question as to any matter ‘relevant to the matter in issue’ in any suit or in any
civil or criminal proceedings ,Upon the ground that the answer to such question
i. will criminate or may tend directly /indirectly to criminate such witness (or)
ii. will expose or tend directly /indirectly to expose such witness
-to penalty or forfeiture of any kind
Question relavant , matter in issue –must answer if refuses he will be criminated under this section
Gives false evidence - punished according to penal provision .-No protection even if give non compulsion of court
Defamatory to party ,advocate or court –prosecuted under sec 500 /IPC or under the provision of contempt of court Act 1971.
If irrelevant need not answer
Answer given –on compulsion by court
Article 20(3)- protection to accused – ‘No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself .’.This
extends to
criminal proceedings only and also does not extend to any witness.i.e. only to the accussed.
Compelled to give –If the question are allowed by the even on the account of objection raised by advocate then it is a relavant question
and he is bound to answer.Compulsion in this case is compulsion by the court and not compulsion by law.
SEC 147 .When a witness is compelled to answer :If any such question relates to the matter relavant to the suit or proceeding , the provision
of sec 132 shall apply thereto .
PROVISO to Sec 132 & eighth exception to sec499 of IPC -Both the sec contain silmilarity in excusing the accussed
8th exception tosec 499 of IPC –excludes the statement of defamation altogether .Assumes that the accusation contained in the answer is punishable as
defamation .Under sec 500 in order to consider whether proviso is applicable or not it is irrelevant to consider whether the answer contain defamation under sec
500 or not ,the proviso will apply even though the statement not made in good faith and not covered by exception
Proviso to sec 132 –excludes the prosecution for defamation and bars the proof of accusation in a trial for defamation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC 133-An accomplice shall be the competent witness against the accused and the conviction is not illegal because it merely proceeds on a
uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.
Accomplice-A guilty associate or partner in crime ;It is not defined any where in evidence act
An accomplice means a guilty associate or partner in a crime ,or who ,in some way or the other connected with the offence in
question , or who makes admission of facts showing that he has concise hands in the offence .An accomplice involves himself to be criminal
and is concerned in the commission of crime.
Accomplice evidence-Evidence of a participant in crime with others . When a witness is concerned with commission of an offence for which an
accussed is charged then he can be said to be an accomplice in that crime.
A. Categories of accomplice
Principals in 1st and 2nd degree Accessories before the fact Accessories after the fact
1st degree –one who commits crime Person who encourages, counsels ,connives The person who helps the principal in 1st and
2nd degree-one who assist the principal in 1st at , or procures the commission of crime 2nd degree after commission of offence .
degree Eg :forged doc Eg:tandoori case –husband of naini sahni
Eg :murder , 3 ppl ,car ,given shelter by police officer IG delhi
B. Non participles Criminis –Person held as accomplice though not participated in the alleged criminal act -2 cases
1. A person received stolen property –Though have not actually participated intheft .The receiver shall be treated to be accomplice of the
thief from whom he received the goods .
2. Similar offences-A previous similar offence has been committee by the accused on trial .They are deemed to be accomplice in the
offence for which the accused is on trial .when the vidence of the accused having committed crimes of identical type on other occasion
be admissible toprove the syatme and intent of the accused in committing the offence is charged.
C. Cases where the accomplice participates in the offence but not considered as co-accused
i. Bribe giver in trap case; ( agreening to pay bribe on pressure- not accomplice bt who gives bribe is accomplice, )
ii. Adultery –wife
iii. Rape-victim is aggrived woman ,though she gives consent under threat /coercion she is not considered as an accomplice.
iv. Minor girl –taken away induced and intercoursed ; she is injured victim .
(Accomplice rule does not apply to departmental enquiries )
SEC 133: expresses that an accomplice shall be a competent witness Sec 114 :court may presume the evidence of accomplice is unworthy
without corroboration unless is corroborated inmaterial particulars
Word : shall – direction which signifies the act must be done . Word : may –which may or may not be done depending upon
Worthy : take evidence without corroboration of material circumstances .
particular Unworthy: take evidence with corroboration of material
particular
.
1. Rampal Pithwa Rahidas Vs.State Of Maharastra
Case where 2 person accused for murder .A gave gave confessional statement ,few days after occurrence of crime .But after 3 year he gave
more details of occurrence than his confession statement .The other B challenged the evidence.SC held that evidence is not reliable and it is
planted witness and his testimony is not worthy of credence.In such case it is unnecessary to look for corroboration of his testimony.
A matter of practice and prudence the testimony of an approver may be accepted in evidence for recording conviction of an accused
person ,provided it receives corroboration from direct or circumstantial evidence in material particular
Rold played by approver : In determining the creditworthiness of the testimony of the approver and nature and extent of corroboration the
court must consider the question as how the approver become arrested and how he participated in crime ,the role played and circumstances
which led him to become an approver .
Though sec133 provides that accomplice accepted without corroboration the illustration (b) to sec 114 provides warning /caution to the court
that accomplice does not generally deserve to be relied upon
2. Suresh Chandra Bahri Vs.State of Bihar
Conviction can be based upon the testimony of accomplice under sec 133 but as rule of prudence reliance shall be placed upon illustration (b)
to sec 114 as rule of caution .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec132: No particular number of witnesses shall be required for the proof of any fact .
1. Raja Vs.State
Court has to see the quality of evidence and not quantity of evidence .Even if it is a solitary statement of witness if the court comes to a
conclusion said statement is true and correct version of the case of the prosecution .
2. Marwadi kishore Parmanand Vs.State Of Gujarat –SC held oral testimony can be classified into three categories
i. Wholly reliable-No difficulty for court to come to a conclusion .It above approach /suspicion
ii. Wholly un reliable- No difficulty for court to come to a conclusion .It above approach /suspicion
iii. Neither Wholly reliable nor Wholly un reliable- Court in such case has to look out for corroboration in material particular by reliable
testimony direct or circumstantial .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 135 - Order Of Production And Examination Of Witnesses
Sec 135: The qrder in which the witnesses are produced and examine shall be ,
i. Regulated by the law and practice for the time being relating to civil and criminal procedure
ii. And in absence of any such law ,by discretion of court
General Practice:
In crl court evidence is taken in order in which it is produced by the prosecutor and seldom court interferes with this order .
None of the sections/rules in evidence act ,CPC,Cr.P.C Contain provisions about ordering witnesses in the court .so court
follows general practice.The court may change the order of witnesses depending upon thecase .
In law and practice , the court allow 1st the prosecutor to adduce and after his witness evidence recorded , the turn comes to
accussed and his witnesses.
In law and practice , relating to civil proceedings the court follow the same procedure.
Achyutana Pitchaiyah Sarma Vs.Gorantla Chinna Veerayya and ors
The suit was filed in 1951 taken up by the lower court .The 4th defendant in the suit is petitioner in this C.R.P .Thus when examination and crs
examination of plaintiff witness was over defendant was present .But when defendant’s 1 st witness Nallui Yacob was put in witness box .The defendant was
present in court sitting .the witness stated ‘ I know the suit lands ‘.The plaintiff counsel objected to 4 th defendant sitting in court .the court ordered 4th defendant
to leave the court hall.
BY a C.R.P 4th defendant raised question.
The A.P.H.C allowed the c.R.P and setaside the order of the lower court and directed the lower ct to reconsider the matter.
Principles
i. .on A/C of improper behaviour of paty/witness ,influence or embarrass of any witness-ct has power to order to leave ct
ii. party entitled to remain in court when witness are being examined,Here no reason are given by lower court forordering his client out
of court hall and client ordered out merely because he is party to the suit .
iii. can court order unexamined witness out of court until their evidence is taken -no procedure prescribed in act but as general rule of
practice followed .Court has inherent power to regulate the business sof the court the way it thinks..Selfe Vs.Issacson –where court
ordered unexamined witness out of court.
iv. Where a party to litigation also wants to examine himself as witness can be ordered out of the court hall unless he examines himself
first as his own witness.
It is a difficulty that prospective witness suffer danger of attempt to falsify testimony &utility of sequestration to expose it .
It’s a gen rights to protect the interest by watching the conduct of trial .
To solve it is prefereable toexempt the party from order of exclusion +require him to take the first stand of the witnesses on his side
v. Outram Vs.Outram:That parties though competent witnesses may be excluded from the court like any other witness .
vi. Jarat Kumari Dassi Vs.Bissessur Dutt : Under the act the witness production and examination have to be done in acc.with the law and
practice for the timebeing related to civil and criminal procedure.IN absence of any such law to the discretion of the court.
vii. 2 set of evidences-medical and eye witnesses-1st examine medical and then eyewitness
viii. GENERAL- 1ST examine party if he himself is witness or examine other witness by sending out the prty witness
ix. The order of production and examination of witness does not apply to dept enquiry
If the fact proposed to be proved is one of which ‘whose evidence is admissible upon the proof of some other fact ‘ then such other fact
to be first proved before evidence to be given of the first mentioned fact –unless the party undertakes to give proof of such fact and court is
satisfied with such undertaking
If the relevancy of one alleged fact depends upon the another alleged fact being first proved ,the judge may in his discretion either
permit --evidence of the first fact to be given before second fact is proved (or)
-require evidence to be given of the second fact before evidence of first fact given.
Illustration
1. prove a statement to be relevant fact given by person alleged to be dead (statement relevant under sec32) .1 st prove the fact that person is dead 2nd
give evidence of the statementtoprove the statement
2. To prove by a copy the contents of the document to be lost .1 ST Prove that original doc is lost 2nd .prove the statement then by producing copy of
document.
3. Acussed received knowingly it’s a stolen property ,it is proposed to prove that he denied the possession of the property .-Relevancy of the denial
depends upon the identity of the property ; court’s discretion –either identify property b4 deniel of possession to be proved (or) permit deniel of
possession to be proved b4 identify the property
4. A,B,C,D –Facts in issue .to prove fact A is cause and effect of fact in issue .1 ST prove A before B,C,D,is proved / Require proof of B,C,D before permitting
proof of A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direction of Re-examination –The reexamination shall be directed to the explanation of matters referred to in cross-examination and if new
matter is , by the permission of the court , introduced in re-examination , the adverse party may cross examine upon that matter
1st step : examination –in –chief - The examination of witness by party who calls him – sec 138 clause (1)
Helps to prove the facts which bear upon the issue in fav of party calling witness .
Witness can give only evidence of fact and no evidence of law
2nd step :cross-examination - The examination of a witness by the adverse party shall be called .- sec 138 clause (1)
To discover truth and expose falsehood.
Highestattainment of advocate’s art.Obtain from such witness admission fav to his cause
If a party refuses to cross examine the witness –then he loses his right and cant ask for it in subsequent stage.court presumes that party
is accepting the truth of statement.
Hostile witness(sec 154)-A party can cross –examine his own witness ,if that witness becomes hostile or if there is lacunae or defect is
required to be rectified in the evidence of his own evidence .Further after the opposite party conducts cross examination ,if any new
facts is revealed then party can re-examine his own witness to bring out the real facts.
3rd step :Re-examination - The examination of witness subsequent to the cross examination by party who calls him with the permission of
court ; it shall be the explanation of matter referred to in cross examination - sec 138 clause (1)
To fill any lacunae or explain any inconsistencies which were discovered in cross examination reexamination is a opportunity
It is done with the permission of the court
New matters can also be introduced with the permission of the court ;this gives opportunity or right to adverse party to cross examine
the witness again
If the cross examination is refused /ineffective then there is no need for re -examination
Leading question cannot be put in re-examination.
4th step :Further cross examination –If any new matter is introduced in re-examination the adverse party with the permission of the court
further cross examine –sec 138 clause (3)
The examination and cross –examination must relate to relavant facts ,but cross-examination need not beconfined to the facts to which the
witness testified on his examination –in-chief . SEC 138 clause (2)
Value of cross examination
The cross examination is the key and important stage in the judicial proceedings .The very purpose of cross examination is to
discredit the evidence of witness and not the witness .The cross examination if not confined to a limit .It is extended to the whole case.
.Every practicing advocate must know the dos and donts of the cross examination Sec 139-166 provides the important rules of
cross examination .The violation of the rules of cross examination may some times lead to the violation of the professional ethics and also
contempt of the court leading to lose of case & client .
Sec 139-166 contain the provison regulating the parties and the practitioners what questions may be asked and what questions not to be
asked .If advocate poses irrelevant , irritative and embarrassing question , he may not only lose the case sometimes he becomes gulty under
professional ethics anf etiquette .
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 141 : Any question suggesting the answer which the person putting it wishes or expects to receive is called leading questions.
LEAD :A leading question means as it indicates –one which leads the witness up to the denied answer i.e one which is put in such a way as to
suggest to the witness the answer which is expected or wanted .
FORM : There is no particular form which make a question leading /not .
i. The fact that a question is put so as to require a categorical answer does not make it leading
ii. Fact that a question prefaced by ‘ whether or not’ so as to avoid a categorical nor save it from leading
Yes /no : Question which may be answered by yes /no is generally leading
But leading question are not limited to just yes / no
?? leading : Question in form of whether /not that is in the alternative is not leading , but when it is proposed in that form ,if it is so framed
as to suggest to the witness the answer desired ,which assumes a fact to be proved which is not proved is a leading question .More properly
such question may be misleading and are objectionable both as likely to mislead a fair witness.
Object: The object of asking a leading question is to make the witness acquaintance and to remove the fear of apprehension from mind of the
witness .It is just like inducing small child with little words.
Leading questions must be
a. Introductory
b. Undisputed
c. Already sufficiently proved
If a question merely suggeats a subject without suggesting an answer or specific thing , it is not leading question.
The answers to leading question are given by yes /no and examiner clearly suggests the answer .
Sec 142 : Leading question must not , if objected to by the adverse party be asked in an examination –in-chief /re-examination , except with
the permission of the court
The court shall permit a leading question as to the matters which are introductory /undisputed /which have in its opinion , been sufficiently
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sec 144 : any witness may be asked under examination w.r.t contract , grant or other disposition of property as to which he is giving
evidence ,
i. was not contained in a document and he says it was ,
ii. If he is about to make statement w.r.t content of the document ,then in the opinion of the court it has to be produced
iii. The adverse party may object to such evidence being given
iv. Until such doc is produced or until facts have been proved –which entitle the party who called the witness to give secondary evidence
of it
Exp:witness may give oral evidence of the statement made by other persons about the contents of documents if such statement are
themselves relevant facts.
Illustration : C deposes about A say to D “B wrote a letter about my theft and I will revenge on him” .This shows A motive for assault ,this may be given
asevidence though no other evidence give nabout the the letter
Imp
Sec 144 should be read along with sec 91 and 92 of the act
Applies to both civil and criminal proceeding
Put to use in both examination –in-chief and cross –examination.
Judicial discretion
Oral evidence
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 145 : A witness may be cross examined as to his previous statements made by him in writing or reduced to writing and relevant matters
in question
i. The writing thus not shown to him , or being proved
ii. But if intended to contradict him by the writing –his attention must be called to those parts of it which are to be used for the purpose
of contradicting him –before the writing can be proved .
Judicial discretion –which permits a person who calls for witness regarding the inconsistent statement being made which might be put in cross-
examination by the adverse party .By this unfavourable testimony or committing slip here and there is not a proper ground to declare witness as
hostile witness .such hostile witness is covered under sec 155 .
Difference :Sec 155 is W.R.T impeaching credit of witnesses .but both sec has similar aim of discrediting the witness by the party calling them
as witness .Infact sec 155 is controlled by 145 .sec 145 seeks to contradict a particular statement of witness as contradicting with previous own
statement where as the sec 155 seeks to declare the witness as hostile and to see entire evidence of witness be smashed .
Shaik Subhani Vs .State of A.P
If the contradiction is put to witness and denied by him even then it will not amount putting contradiction to the witness
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 138 , 140 ,145, 146 ,148 ,154,155 –shake the character of witness though it may not be a issue in a case .The adverse party is allowed to
certain extent only and not exceed the limit .These sections restrict the nature of questions to be asked to shake witness .
Sec 146 :When a witness is cross examined he may in addition to the questions herein before referred to , be asked any question which tend
i. To test his veracity
ii. To discover who he is and what his position in life or
iii. To shake his credit , by injuring his character ,although the answer to such question might directly / indirectly to criminate him or
might expose or tend directly /indirectly to expose him to penalty or forfeiture .
Provided- that in a prosecution for rape or attempt tocommit rape , it shall not be permissible to put questions in the cross examination of the
prosecutrix as to her general immoral character .
Defamation : object of this is to reveal the truth , by questioning and such question must be lawful made with permission of court .Therefore
question of defamation does not arise in this case .and sec 500 IPC does not apply .If witness feels that answer to particular question would defame he
can get privilege under sec 132.
Exception : The proviso to this sec gives privilege and protection to prosecutrix .According to this the adverse party should not ask questions as
to general immoral character of the prosecutrix
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 147 When witness to be compelled to answer
Sec 147 says that if any such question relates to a matter relavant to the suit or proceedings , the provisions of sec 132 shall apply thereto
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 148- court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness compelled to answer
Sec 148 :If any such question relates to a matter not relevant to the suit or proceeding , except in so far as it affects the credit of the witness
by injuring his character ,
i. the court shall decide whether or not the witness shall be compelled to answer it
ii. and may if it thinks fit warn the witness that he is not obliged to answer it
In exercising its discretion , the court shall have regard to the following considerations.
1. Such questions are proper – if they are of such nature that the truth of the imputation conveyed by them would seriously
affect the opinion of the court as to the credibility of the witness on the matter to which he testifies.
2. Such questions are improper- if the imputation to which they convey relates to matters so remote intime , or of such a
character , that the the truth of the imputation would not affect , or would affect in slight degree ,the opinion of the court as
to the credibility of the witness on the matter to which he testifies
3. Such questions are improper- if there is greater disproportion between the importance of the imputation made against the
witnesses character and importance of his evidence.
4. The court may if it sees fit draw , from the witnesses refusal to answer , the inference that the answer if given would be
unfavourable.
In this sec empowers the court –to prohibit /allow a question
If allowa question and witness refuse to answera question the draw an inference
that if answered would be unfavourable to him
To refuse to draw any inference
Sec 149 questions not to be asked without reasonable grounds
Sec 149 : No such question as is referred to in section 148 ought to be asked , unless the person asking it has a reasonable grounds for
thinking that the imputation which it convey is well founded.
Illus:
1. Barrister instructed by attorney –imp witness is dakait-reasonable ground to ask whether he is dakait
2. A pleader informed by the person in the court that imp witness is dakait-pleader on question to informant get satifactory answer-
reasonable ground to ask whether he is dakait
3. At random a witness asked whether he is dakait –no reasonable ground to ask whether he is dakait
4. A witness of whom nothing is known being questioned as to his mode of life and means of living on which he gives satisfactory
answer - reasonable ground to ask whether he is dakait
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sec 150 Procedure of court in case of questions being asked without reasonable grounds
sec 150 :If the court is of the opinion that any such question was asked without reasonable grounds, if may , if it was asked by any barrister ,
pleader , vakil or attorney ,report the circumstances of the case to the High Court or other authority to which such barrister , pleader , vakil or
attorneyis subject in exercise of his profession .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 151 Indecent and scandalous questions ; Sec 152 questions intended to insult or annoy
Sec 151 :The court may forbid any questions or inquiries which it regards as indecent or scandalous , although such questions or inquiries may
have some bearing on the questions or inquiries may have some bearing on the questions before the court , unless they relate to the facts in
issue or to matters necessary to be known in order to determine whether or not the facts in issue existed.
Sec 152: The court shall forbid any question which appears to it be intended to insult or annoy , or which , though proper in itself , appears to
the court needlessly offensive in form .
Patiently &amicably ;No raise of voice ;No emotion ;startwith good question not bad question
No fishing for answer ; No argue with witness
No insult /annoy the witness ; Irritating and scandalous
No unreasonable question ; Question framed depending upon the witness therefore prepare list of Q
Respect to be given ; Bring to notice of court –if witness answer impolitely &improper way
Most sensitive question w.r.t marriage , religion carefully asked.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 153 : When a witness has been asked and has answered any questions which is relevant to the inquiry only in so far as it tends to shake
his credit by injuring his character , no evidence shall be given to contradict him ;but , if he answers falsely ,he may afterwards be charged
with giving false evidence.
Illus:
1.underwriter resisted on ground of fraud .question in former transactin he had not made any fraudulent claim.He denies.but evidence there 2
prove-inadmissible
2.Witness asked whether he was dismissed from service on account of dishonesty .He denies it . but evidence there 2 prove –in admissible
3.its affirmed y Saw X at Lahore .question whether he was at calctta that day .He denied it . but evidence there 2 prove – admissible(false
evidence )
4.A asked whether he had blood feud with family B. He denied it.He may be contradicted on ground that the question tend to impeach his
impartiality .
Whether sec 153 controls 155(3)-they are independent of each other
Sec 146 and sec 153 – clause (3) of sec 146 shall be read with sec 153
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 154: The court may in its discretion ,permit the person who calls a witness to put any question to him which might be put
in cross-examination by the opposite party.
Hostile –unfriendly : A witness is ordinarily expected to be in favour of the party by whom he is called .But in some circumstances ,the
witness called by a party may unexpectedly turn hostile to him or unwilling to speak truth .such witness is called hostile witness.
In order to obtain the leave to cross examine all that is necessary is that the witnesses testimony should have been adverse to the party
calling him and value of the witnesses testimony is to be judged in the light of the results of such cross examination .It is good faith or bad
faith , of witness instead of being judged by the test of cross examination should be held to be prejudged by the mere fact that cross-
examination is permitted.
If a witness turn hostile during examination –in-chief the court may give permission to put question which may be put in cross examination
.But if a witness hostile during cross examination permission to party producing witness may be given at the stage of re-examination
Following the cross examination by own party ,the adverse party is entitled to cross examine.
The prosection witness deposes a new version in the cross examination contracdicting his own statement under 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.The
fresh statement was hostile to the prosecution .
With the persmission of the court when a witness is cross examined by the party and by that court comes to a conclusion that witness is a
hostile witness .But if satisfied by the court of portion of evidence .It may be accepted and acted upon and such evidence need not be
discarded altogether as matter of law.The court should look for corroboration in such case .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 155:The credit of witness impeached by the adverse party or party who calls him in the following ways.
1. by the evidence of person s who testify that they , from their knowledge of the witness , believe him to be unworthy of credit.
2. By proof that the witness has been bribed , or has accepted the offer of a bribe , or has received any other corrupt inducement to give
his evidence
3. By proof of former statement inconsistent with any part of his evidence which is liable to be contradicted.
Expl: A witness declaring another witness to be unworthy of credit may not , upon his examination-in chief give reasons for his belief , but he
may be asked his reasons in cross examination and the answer which he gives cannot be contradicted , though , if they are false , he may
afterwards be charged with giving false evidence.
Price of goods sold -now –delivered ;previously-not delivered –the evidence admissible
Indiction for murder –now-wounded by x coz of which he died ; previous-wound not by x - the evidence admissible
Court usually depends upon the evidence of witness to arrive at the truth of falsity of the claim or charge in the litigation .Court may
pay attention on the trustworthiness .In case the witness change his mind and give evidence contrary to the fact .In those circumstances the
parties of the suit should be empowered to give independent testimony as to character of the witness showing that he is unworthy of belief by
the court .This is called impeaching credit of witness.
( Impeach- by both parties, 3 ways, by another witness ,discretion of the court )
i. Clause (3) of sec 155 and sec 145- both contradict credit of witness ; 145 by previous written statement ;155 both by oral and written
ii. Sec55 and sec 155 –sec 55 prohibits the character evidence in reg to subject matter of suit ; sec 155 manner of impeaching credit of
witness.bot are framed with different purpose .therefore sec 55 is not exception to sec 155.
FIR against accussed is permissible under sec 155 to impeach informant’s credt sbject to condition that he must be called as witness before the
court .previous statement of witness under sec 164Cr.P.C admisisible under sec 155.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORROBORATION
Corroborate :To confirm or support to a statement or theory ; to add weight or credibility to a thing .The act of corroborating or strengthening
or confirming ; addition of strength ; confirmation
Value Of Corroboration :
Corroboration enhances value of evidence adduced
It must be reliable and independent evidence
Gives full assurance and satisfaction of the court .
Must be on Material particulars .and cannot be set aside on ground of particulars.
R Vs.Beck
Corroborative evidence need not relate to a particular incidents or incidents spoken to by the suspect witness.It was merely independent
testimony which confirmed in some material particular not only crime has been committed but also that defendant had committed.
Illustration (j) and (k) under sec 8 of evidence act explains corroborative evidence
Sec 156 : When a witness whom it is intended to corroborate (rent receipt ,blood stain on clothes )
i. Gives evidence of any relevant fact
ii. He may be questioned as to any other circumstances –which he observed at or near to the time or place at which such relevant fact
occurred
If court is of opinion that such circumstances if proved would corroborate testimony of the witness as to the relevant fact which he testifies
Illus :An accomplice in robbery gives various incidents unconnected with robbery which occurred on his way to and from the place where it
was committed. Independence evidence of this kind may be given in order to corroborate his evidence as to the robbery itself.
-------------------
Sec 157 Former Statements Of Witness May Be Proved To Corroborate Later Testimony As To Same Fact
Sec 157 :In osrder to corroborate the testimony of a witness , any former statement made by such witness relating to the same fact
i. or about the time when the fact took place ,
ii. or before any authority legally competent to investigate the fact , may be proved.
1. Statement :something stated which consist of element of communication to another person (oral /written , no hearsay)
Plaint /written statement
Previous deposition statement made by parties and witnesses
Previous statement made by accomplice.
Statement by witness at identification parade
Statement made by 3rd parties to police during investigation
Police diaries
A panchanama
2. or about the time: Specifies the importance of time.Rape –W.R.T sec 6 –immediately ;W.R.T SEC 157 –in some time or
shortly after that
3. Authority legally competent to investigate the fact – judge /magistrate , person having power under some law statutory .
-------------------------
Sec 158 : what matters may be proved inconnection with proved statement relevant under section 32 /33
(Previous statement made under sec 32/33 , statement given during police investigation , contradict /corroborate - impeach or confirm by
calling –under cross exam proved / denied)
Sec 158:Whenever a relevant statement , made under sec 32/33 ‘ is proved ‘
All other matters ‘may be proved’ in order to 1.contradict /corroborate 2.impeach or confirm the credit of person by whom it was made
Which ‘might have been proved’ if that person had been called as witness and had denied upon cross examination of the truth of the matter
suggested
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
REFRESHING MEMORY
------------------------
Sec 160 Testimony to facts stated in document mentioned in sec 159
Sec160 : A witness may also testify of the facts mentioned in any such documents as is mentioned in sec 159 , although he has no specific
recollection of the facts themselves , if he is sure that the facts were correctly recorded in the document .(book keeper –forgot about particular
transaction , knows books correctly kept)
(the witness when requiring for the doc should have known fact of doc / participated in preparing doc / should have read it immediately
/reasonable time after preparing or atleast attested it)
-----------------------
Sec161:Any writing referred to under the provisions of the two last preceding sections must be produced and shown to the adverse party if he
requires it .such party may if he pleases , cross examine the witness there upon.
(adverse party may look upon it just at the time when the witness requires it )
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
Translation of document -If for such a purpose it is necessary to cause any document to be translated , the court if it thinks fit direct the
translator to keep the contents secret , unless the document is to be given in evidence ;and if the interpreter disobeys such direction he shall
be held to have committed an offence under sec 166 IPC.(1yr /fine /both).
------------------------
Sec 163 giving as evidence of document called for and produced on notice
Sec 163: When a party calls for a document which has given the other party notice to produce ,
and such document is produced and inspected by the party calling for its production
he is bound to give it as evidence if the party producing it requires him to do so .
----------------------------------
Sec 164 :when a party refuses to produce a document which he had notice to produce , he cannot afterwards use the document as evidence
‘without the consent of the other party or the order of the court’
Sec 130 &131 Vs.Sec 164 - Sec 130 &131 privillege to the witness that too pertaining to titile deeds of the witness who is not a party to the
suit and doc and electronic records are in possession of 3 rd party . Sec 164 where court issue summons to party who is in possession of such
document before the court
Sec 123 Vs.Sec 164 - Sec 123 privillege to state documents .refused if doc does not relate to state affairs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC 165: Judge may in order todiscover or to obtain proper proof of relevant fact
i. Ask any question as he pleases –in any form , at any time , of any witness, or of the parties, about any fact relevant or irrelevant
ii. And may order production of any document or thing
iii. And neither parties nor theiragents are entitled to make any objection to any such question or order
iv. And nor without the leave of the court to cross examine any witness upon any answer given in reply to any such question .
Provided –the judgement must be based upon the facts declared by this act …to be relevant and duly proved
Provided also –
No authorization for judge / adverse party –to compel witness to answer a question /produce document which they entitle to refuse /produce U/S 121 -131
Nor judge shall ask any other question iimproper for any person –under sec 148/149
Nor shall he dispense with primary evidence of any document , except in cases herein before mentioned .
------------------------------------------
SEC 166: In cases tried by jury or with assessors , the jury or assessors may put any question to the witnesses , through or by leave of the
judge , by which the judge himself might put and which he considers proper .
The provisions of order 8 rule 17 cpc empower the court to call and reexamine the witness just like sec 165 .both the provision does not allow to raise
objection to question asked for nor permitted to cross examine any witness without leave of the court .but they can suggest question to be asked.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec 167 :No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence
Sec 167 : The improper admission or rejection of evidence shall not be ground of itself for a new trial or reversal of any decision in any case .
If it shall appear to the court before which such objection was raised that ,
Independently of the evidence objected to and admitted
There was sufficient evidence to justify the decision
Or that if rejected evidence have been received …. It ought not to have varied the decision .
Under sec 167 the exclusion of evidence which was admissible is not by itself a sufficient ground for reversing the lower court’s decision ,
unless the appellate court comes to a conclusion that the evidence refused , if it had been received would have varied the decision .
The mere fact thatsome evidence which may not be strictly admissible has been admitted is no ground for setting aside decision of trial court.
Remand and appeal :
When a trial court under sec 167 empowered to finalise decision after hearing argument and recording evidence .during or after the
delivery of judgement if it pointed out of improper admission and seek court of fresh trial, it need not be heeded by the court .The trial court
may deliver judgement according to its judicial mind.
If it is brought to the notice of appellate court of improper admission or rejection of evidence , the appellate court may remand the
case again to the trial court or dispose the appeal on the merits of the points involved in the issue.tHus the findings of the court with irrelevant
material / inadmissible material is vitiated and therefore the case should be remanded for hearing .
1. C.G.Lloyd Vs.Emperor –opp Party
The Calcutta H.C sent the case for retrial and held that the trial ytook a course substantially diff from that contamplated by the law by the
admission of large body of inadmissible evidence and the case would be outside the purview of sec 167.
2. Madan Lal Chawla Vs. The Principal ,Harcourt Butler Technological Institute , Kanpur and others .
In trial there were 12 charges .In 11 charges evidence properly conducted and in 1 charge improperly conducted .T.C.convicted.The Session
Judge reversed .The Allahabad H.C set aside judgement of SES.C. and upheld conviction .That based upon the other finding the T.C. has
convicted and it is not that merely because something extraneous has been taken into consideration .