Introduction

The witness examination is an integral part of a trial. The testimonies of witness is the most reliable evidence as the witness giving the statements has witnessed the events. Section 135 to 165 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with the examination and cross-examination of witnesses. The Indian Evidence Act Section 5 provides that the evidence is only admissible when it supports the relevant fact in the issue.

Leading Questions

Section 141 of the Evidence Act deals with leading questions as any question that suggests the answer that the person questioning expects to receive. One party must object if the other party asks a leading question to the witness. A leading question is the one that it suggests the answer to the question asked.

When can a leading question be asked to a witness?

According to Section 142 of the Act, a leading question can be asked in an examination-in-chief, or a re-examination if the Court permits. It must be noted that a leading question can’t be asked in examination-in-chief, cross-examination, or re-examination only if objected to by the other party. Such questions may be asked if the other party does not object.

Cross-examination of the previous statements

The statements given by a witness have to be reduced in writing. He can at a later stage of cross-examination be contradicted on his prior made statements. Section 145 of the Act says that relevant questions may be asked by the lawyer without showing the writings to the witness.

In Purshottam Jethanand v. The State of Kutch, AIR 1954 SC 700– It was observed by the Court that Section 145 of the Act won’t help the accused to get the statements made during the investigation, however, it is helpful to use such statements in case he somehow obtained them. The statement on which the witness is being contradicted must be relevant to the matter issue.

Lawful Questions

The Court shall take the witness’s statements as evidence but it must be proved that the witness is telling the truth. Section 146 of the Evidence Act states that during cross-examination of a witness, he may also be asked questions to:

• Test his accuracy or truthfulness.
• Understand more about the witness and his position in life.
• To shake his credit by questioning his character.

Questions must be on reasonable grounds

The question to the accused person may only be asked on the reasonable ground as provisioned under Section 149 of the Evidence Act. The unreasonable questions cannot be asked of the witness or the accused person. As per Sec. 150 of the Act, if any barrister, pleader, or attorney asks questions without any reasonable grounds, then the Court must report the matter to the High Court or other authority to which such advocate is the subject in the exercise of his profession.

Forbidden Questions

Section 151 of the Act forbids indecent or scandalous questions from the accused or witness. In Mohammad Mian v. Emperor, 1919- The Court held that these questions may only be permitted if related to the matter and are regarding a relevant fact in an issue, or essential for finding out whether some fact in an issue exists.

Further, Section 152 provides that annoying questions must be forbidden and should not be asked of the witnesses. The Court might forbid a question even if it is proper, but the Court thinks that it is needlessly offensive in form.

Questions attacking the witness’s character must be avoided

Question asked during an examination of a witness must establish a fact in the case, and should not be asked to shake his credit or injure his character, it is provisioned u/s 153 of the Act.

There are two exceptions to this section, which are:

• A question may be asked from the witness about his previous conviction and on denial of the witness, the evidence regarding the proof of his previous conviction can be given.
• A question asked from the witness that impeaches his impartiality, on denial of witness, he may be contradicted.

In State of Karnataka v. Yarappa Reddy, (1999) 8 SCC 715- The Apex Court added that the basic requirement to adduce such contradictory evidence is that the witness, whose impartiality is in question needs to be presented with evidence.

Questions by a party to his own witness

According to Section 154 of the Act, questions may be asked by the party that calls a witness to ask any question to their witness like they are cross-examining him. This usually happens when the witness turns hostile.

In Sat Paul v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1976 SC 294- The Apex Court has interpreted the instant provision (Sec. 154 of the Act) and defined a hostile witness as one who is not willing, to tell the truth when a party calls him.

As held in the case of Atul Bora v. Akan Bora,  AIR 2007 Gau 51- It was clarified that the purpose of cross-examination of the witness by the party who calls it; there needs to be enough evidence to show that the witness is telling lies and that he has turned hostile.

In another case of State of Rajasthan v. Bhera, 1997 CriLJ 1237– It was observed by the Court that a previous testimony of a hostile witness can also be taken into use as evidence as the same was on record.

Conclusion

According to the Evidence Act, it is very necessary to protect the witnesses, by allowing them to speak freely without any fear of prosecution. The witness statements are very useless and hence the examination of a witness by lawyers should be conducted wisely.