Sections 154, 155 and 156 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Own Witness, Impeaching Credit and Corroboration
Sections 154, 155 and 156 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 dealt with three connected aspects of witness examination: permission to question one's own witness in the manner of cross-examination, methods of impeaching a witness's credit, and questions concerning surrounding circumstances that may corroborate testimony.
Section 154 - Question by party to his own witness
Meaning: Section 154 gave the Court discretion to allow the party who called a witness to ask that witness questions which could ordinarily be asked by the adverse party in cross-examination. The provision addressed the situation commonly associated with a witness who turns adverse or does not support the case of the party calling the witness.
Section 154(1): 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 154(2): Such permission does not disentitle the party who called the witness from relying on any part of that witness's evidence.
Practical effect of Section 154
- Permission is controlled by the Court's discretion; it is not an automatic right merely because a witness gives an unfavourable answer.
- The party calling the witness may, after permission, use questions of the kind ordinarily available in cross-examination.
- The whole testimony is not automatically discarded merely because the Court permits such questioning. Section 154(2) expressly preserves the calling party's ability to rely on any part of the evidence.
Section 155 - Impeaching credit of witness
Meaning: To impeach the credit of a witness is to place before the Court legally permissible material bearing on the witness's credibility. Under Section 155, this could be done by the adverse party or, with the consent of the Court, by the party who called the witness.
The credit of a witness may be impeached:
(1) by evidence of persons who, from their knowledge of the witness, believe the witness to be unworthy of credit;
(2) by proof that the witness has been bribed, has accepted the offer of a bribe, or has received any other corrupt inducement to give evidence; and
(3) by proof of former statements inconsistent with any part of the witness's evidence which is liable to be contradicted.
Explanation: A witness who says that another witness is unworthy of credit may not give the reasons for that belief in examination-in-chief, but may be asked those reasons in cross-examination. The answers cannot be contradicted, though a false answer may expose the witness to proceedings for giving false evidence.
Illustrations to Section 155
Illustration (a): A sues B for the price of goods sold and delivered. C says that he delivered the goods to B. Evidence that C had earlier said that he had not delivered the goods to B is admissible as an inconsistent former statement.
Illustration (b): A is indicted for the murder of B. C says that B, when dying, declared that A caused the wound from which B died. Evidence that C had earlier said that the wound was not caused by A or in A's presence is admissible.
Section 156 - Questions tending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact
Meaning: Where a witness gives evidence of a relevant fact and it is intended to corroborate that testimony, Section 156 permitted questions about other circumstances observed by the witness at or near the time or place of the relevant event, provided the Court considered that proof of those circumstances would corroborate the testimony.
A witness intended to be corroborated may therefore be questioned about surrounding circumstances observed at or near the relevant time or place when those circumstances, if proved, would support the witness's testimony concerning the relevant fact.
Illustration to Section 156
An accomplice gives an account of a robbery in which he took part and describes incidents, not themselves part of the robbery, that occurred while travelling to and from the place of occurrence. Independent evidence of those surrounding incidents may be given if it tends to corroborate the accomplice's evidence about the robbery.
Sections 154, 155 and 156 at a glance
Section 154 concerned the Court's permission to a party to put cross-examination-type questions to its own witness and preserved the right to rely on any useful part of that witness's evidence. Section 155 specified lawful methods for attacking credibility. Section 156 allowed questions about sufficiently connected surrounding circumstances capable of corroborating testimony about a relevant fact.