Hostile Witness Handling — Advocate at Asansol Court

A witness turns hostile when he departs from the statement he earlier gave to the police or resiles from the facts he was expected to prove in court. Common in Asansol cases are last-minute turnarounds after pressure from the accused, inducement, or genuine fear for personal safety. Not every inconsistency makes a witness hostile; the court looks at whether the witness is deliberately suppressing the truth of what he actually saw.

The prosecution, or the party that called the witness, cannot simply abandon him once he resiles. The party applies to the court for permission to cross-examine that witness, and if the court is satisfied that the witness is not telling the truth, it grants leave. The witness is then treated, for limited purposes, like an adverse witness put up by the other side in the case. This is why the party must act as soon as the departure from the earlier statement becomes clear.

Section 154 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, replacing Section 154 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, allows the court to permit a party to put questions to its own witness in the manner of cross-examination. The court may also permit the party to put leading questions to that witness. Permission is sought after the witness resiles, and the reasons for granting leave are recorded by the court.

The purpose of the provision is not to harass the witness but to bring out the truth and to confront him with his earlier statement. The court exercises its discretion and will not allow a fishing expedition. The application is usually brief and is supported by the material contradiction between the police statement on record and the testimony the witness now gives in court. A short and focused application is usually far more persuasive to the court than a long narration of the whole case.

The police statement of the witness, recorded during the investigation, contains what he said earlier to the investigating officer. When he testifies differently in court, the contradiction is proved by confronting him with that statement. Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, the relevant portion of the earlier statement may be marked and proved through the investigating officer, who brings the official records to the court.

The witness must be given an opportunity to explain the contradiction before it can be used against him. Careful cross-examination narrows the point to essentials: not every minor variation matters, but a material departure on a fact essential to the offence can be fatal to the prosecution's claim that the witness supports the charge. Precision, therefore, matters far more than volume in such cross-examination. The object is to destroy the value of the hostile testimony, not to browbeat or humiliate the witness before the court.

The investigating officer is a crucial witness in a hostile-witness case. He can prove the police statement, the scene of occurrence, the seizure of articles, and the steps taken during the investigation. When a witness resiles, the prosecution can examine the investigating officer to bring the earlier statement on record and to explain the course of the investigation clearly to the court. He also speaks to the fairness of the investigation, which the defence frequently attacks during the trial.

The officer's case diary and the statement recorded under the criminal procedure are used to confront the hostile witness. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which replaced the Criminal Procedure Code, governs these records and their use in court. Through the officer, the earlier version of events reaches the court even if the witness now denies having said any of it. The official record thus speaks even when the witness in the box does not.

A hostile witness does not automatically destroy the prosecution case. The rest of the evidence, including documents, forensic material and other witnesses, can still establish the offence beyond reasonable doubt. The hostile testimony itself may be relied upon by the court to the extent that it supports the prosecution, and the whole record is assessed together on its merits before any decision is reached. The court weighs the credible part of the evidence as a whole.

Hostility weakens the case most where the sole eyewitness is the one who turns, and it can expose that witness to consequences for giving false evidence. In serious trials, the prosecution may also seek protection for threatened witnesses and pursue the persons who induced the turn. An Asansol lawyer can build the case around the independent evidence rather than depend on a single wavering witness. The survival of a case involving a hostile witness depends on how well the other evidence is marshalled by the prosecution.