Hostile Witnesses Provisions
⚖️ What is a Hostile Witness?
A hostile witness is a witness who intentionally deviates from their previous statements or gives testimony against the party who called them, thereby adversely affecting the party's case.
The term "hostile witness" is not defined in the Indian Evidence Act, but is well recognized in legal practice and jurisprudence.
🧾 Legal Provisions Related to Hostile Witnesses
✅ Section 154 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872
This section empowers the court to allow the party who calls a witness to cross-examine them, if the court believes that the witness is hostile or adverse.
"The Court may, in its discretion, permit the person who calls a witness to put any questions to him which might be put in cross-examination by the adverse party."
✅ Section 145 – Indian Evidence Act
Deals with the use of previous inconsistent statements of a witness to impeach their credibility.
✅ Section 161 CrPC
Statements made to police during investigation can be used only for contradiction, not as substantive evidence.
🔍 Essentials of Declaring a Witness Hostile
Deviates from earlier statement made under Section 161 CrPC.
Supports the accused when initially the witness supported the prosecution.
Demonstrates evasion, hostility, or deliberate suppression of truth.
The party calling the witness must seek court’s permission to declare the witness hostile.
📚 Important Case Laws (More than 5)
1. Sat Paul v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1976 SC 294
Facts:
A witness gave a completely different version during trial compared to what he told police earlier.
Held:
The Supreme Court held that if a witness deliberately resiles from a prior statement, the party calling the witness can be permitted to cross-examine.
Significance:
This case laid the foundation for handling hostile witnesses in Indian law.
2. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Ramesh Prasad Misra, AIR 1996 SC 2766
Facts:
The prosecution’s main witness turned hostile during the trial.
Held:
The Court ruled that just because a witness is declared hostile, their entire testimony doesn’t become useless. Courts can rely on the parts of the testimony which are credible and corroborated.
Significance:
Clarified that even a hostile witness can give reliable evidence, partially admissible.
3. Khujji @ Surendra Tiwari v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1991 SC 1853
Facts:
An eyewitness turned hostile during trial. However, his initial statement matched medical and forensic evidence.
Held:
The Court held that hostile witnesses’ statements can be partially accepted if corroborated by independent evidence.
Significance:
Confirmed that the testimony of a hostile witness cannot be discarded entirely.
4. Koli Lakhmanbhai Chanabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1999 SC 2105
Facts:
A prosecution witness supported the accused during trial.
Held:
The Supreme Court held that hostility of a witness indicates outside influence, and courts should be cautious in evaluating their evidence.
Significance:
Highlighted how witness turning hostile can be a result of threat or coercion.
5. Ramesh Harijan v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 2012 SC 1979
Facts:
Prosecution witnesses changed their version completely.
Held:
Court held that mere declaration of a witness as hostile doesn’t mean prosecution’s case fails. Courts must examine all evidence holistically.
Significance:
Reiterated that truth can emerge even from hostile witnesses when cross-examined properly.
6. State of Madhya Pradesh v. Jagat Ram, AIR 1954 SC 683
Facts:
Witness deviated from earlier statement; prosecution sought to cross-examine.
Held:
Court granted permission under Section 154 and reaffirmed that previous statements can be used to contradict, not to substitute testimony.
Significance:
Clarified how and when prior statements can be used in light of hostility.
7. Gagan Kanojia v. State of Punjab, (2006) 13 SCC 516
Facts:
Eye-witnesses turned hostile under pressure.
Held:
Supreme Court allowed conviction based on partial credibility of hostile witnesses supported by forensic evidence.
Significance:
Demonstrated that hostility does not always weaken the prosecution if other evidence is strong.
🧠 Key Takeaways from Case Law
| Legal Point | Case Law |
|---|---|
| Witness can be cross-examined by calling party | Sat Paul v. Delhi Administration |
| Hostile witness testimony can be partly accepted | Khujji v. State of MP |
| Hostility doesn’t automatically discredit entire testimony | Ramesh Prasad Misra |
| Threats or coercion can lead to hostility | Koli Lakhmanbhai |
| Court can rely on corroborated parts of hostile evidence | Gagan Kanojia |
⚖️ Court’s Discretion in Declaring a Witness Hostile
The decision lies entirely with the judge. The court may permit cross-examination of a witness by the party who called them only if satisfied that the witness is not telling the truth or is acting adversely.
🔐 Practical Implications
Hostile witnesses are common in criminal trials, especially in sensitive cases like rape, murder, dowry death, etc.
Courts often suspect witness tampering when a crucial witness turns hostile.
The law allows partial reliance on their testimony if supported by other evidence.
Courts must strike a balance between protecting witness credibility and ensuring justice.
RELATED Blog
0 comments