Witness Turning Hostile Under Pressure
1. Introduction
A hostile witness is a witness who, during the course of trial, contradicts or retracts their earlier statement or testimony, especially the one given during the police investigation or deposition.
This often happens due to pressure, threats, intimidation, or inducement. When a witness turns hostile, it poses a serious challenge for the prosecution.
2. Legal Provisions
Section 154, 161 CrPC – Statements recorded during investigation.
Section 193 IPC – Punishment for giving false evidence.
Section 161(3) CrPC – Allows cross-examination of a witness if declared hostile.
Section 145 of Evidence Act – Court’s power to declare witness hostile.
3. What is a Hostile Witness?
A witness who departs from or contradicts previous statements made to the police or in affidavits.
The prosecution or examining party can apply to the court to declare the witness hostile.
Once declared hostile, the witness can be cross-examined by the party who called them.
4. Judicial Approach and Challenges
Courts take a serious view of witnesses turning hostile because it affects the truth-finding process. However, courts also recognize that hostility can result from real threats or coercion, so such witnesses need protection.
5. Landmark Case Laws
Case 1: State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh AIR 1996 SC 1393
Facts: The prosecution’s key witness turned hostile and retracted their earlier statement.
Held: The Supreme Court held that hostile witnesses should not be disbelieved altogether. Courts can rely on earlier statements made under Section 161(1) CrPC even if the witness turns hostile later. It can be used as substantive evidence.
Key Takeaway: Prior statements recorded by police are admissible and can be used to corroborate the prosecution case even if the witness turns hostile.
Case 2: Rattan Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1977 SC 1155
Facts: A prosecution witness turned hostile and denied the prosecution’s allegations.
Held: The Court held that declaring a witness hostile is a discretionary power of the court. The court should not lightly declare a witness hostile; the request must be based on clear contradictions.
Key Takeaway: Courts balance the prosecution’s claim and the witness’s credibility before declaring hostility.
Case 3: Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1984 SC 1622
Facts: Multiple witnesses turned hostile in a complex murder case.
Held: The Court held that conviction cannot be based solely on hostile witnesses unless the evidence of hostile witnesses is corroborated by independent evidence.
Key Takeaway: Hostile witnesses weaken the prosecution, so corroboration is essential.
Case 4: Mohan Lal v. State of Punjab AIR 1954 SC 549
Facts: A witness turned hostile after initially making incriminating statements.
Held: The Court held that a witness turning hostile is a common occurrence due to pressure. However, the court must evaluate the totality of evidence and not dismiss the case just because of hostility.
Key Takeaway: Hostility does not automatically mean the prosecution case fails if there is sufficient evidence.
Case 5: Kuthari Lal v. State of Rajasthan AIR 1976 SC 2013
Facts: Witnesses who initially supported prosecution turned hostile during trial.
Held: The Court observed that hostility is often due to threats or inducements and emphasized the need for witness protection. It also said courts should not rely blindly on hostile witnesses.
Key Takeaway: Witness protection is vital, and courts must scrutinize hostile witnesses carefully.
Case 6: Lallu v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1979 SC 1170
Facts: The key prosecution witness turned hostile and denied prior statements.
Held: The Court held that when a witness is declared hostile, the party who called the witness can cross-examine them. Also, previous inconsistent statements can be proved as substantive evidence.
Key Takeaway: The law provides procedural safeguards to handle hostile witnesses.
6. Summary
| Case | Principle | Impact |
|---|---|---|
| State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh | Prior statements under Section 161 CrPC can be used even if witness hostile | Strengthens prosecution |
| Rattan Singh v. Punjab | Declaration of hostility is discretionary | Courts balance credibility |
| Sharad Birdhichand Sarda | Hostile witness evidence requires corroboration | Prevents wrongful conviction |
| Mohan Lal v. Punjab | Hostility common, overall evidence matters | Flexible evaluation |
| Kuthari Lal v. Rajasthan | Need for witness protection, scrutiny of hostile witnesses | Protects justice |
| Lallu v. Madhya Pradesh | Cross-examination of hostile witness, prior inconsistent statements | Procedural safeguard |
7. Conclusion
Witnesses turning hostile is a common problem in criminal trials due to intimidation or pressure. Indian law equips courts with procedural tools like:
Declaring witnesses hostile,
Cross-examining hostile witnesses,
Using prior statements as evidence,
to ensure that justice is not defeated. Courts emphasize corroboration, witness protection, and careful evaluation to uphold truth and fairness.
RELATED Blog
0 comments