Skip to main content

Types of Witness Examination and pertaining issues

 Types of Witness Examination and pertaining issues


It is indisputable that witnesses play an important role in providing aid to the court in order to

ensure that justice is administered. Evidence is important in any type of case, but it is the witness

who throws light on the complexities that have been highlighted in that particular case. It has been

established a structure and procedure in this regard through several statutory provisions, with

Sections 135 to 166 of the Evidence Act covering the examination of witnesses.

First and first, it is necessary to comprehend what is meant by the term "Witness." When it is

mentioned in Section 31 that there are two components of 'Evidence,' it is the 'witness' who is the

first component and recorded evidence as the second component. It also includes the definition of

oral evidence, which in simplest terms means all statements that are permitted by the court or

compelled to be made before it by the witnesses with reference to the facts that are under

investigation. It also includes the definition of documentary evidence. This type of evidence must be

straightforward.

In terms of production, place an order.

In accordance with Section 35 of the Indian Evidence Act, the handling of production orders and

witness examination is contemplated. The procedure for witness examination is addressed in the

CPC's Order 18 and the CrPC's Chapters 18, 19, 21 and 24. The most important question is who will

be the first to question its witness and in what order this will take place. In criminal proceedings, it is

the prosecution's side that is in charge of gathering evidence.

S. 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code offers broad authority to courts for summoning and

interrogating witnesses, as well as any other person present, who they judge relevant. It also grants

authority to recall and re-examine witnesses who have already been interrogated. Any deviation

from the order relative to the collecting of evidence has the potential to cause severe prejudice to

one or more parties or to result in a miscarriage of justice.

In terms of witness examination, the following is the order:

Based on English Common Law method, this procedure is divided into three stages. The first step is

the examination in chief, followed by cross-examination, and finally the re-examination. 4. Section

137 of the Evidence Act deals with the definition of all three examinations, and this order is defined

in accordance with Section 138 of the Evidence Act. The examination in main must address the

pertinent facts; on the other hand, the cross-examination does not have to be confined to the facts

that have been attested to by the witness in order to be effective. The feature of re-examination

occurs after the cross-examination and helps to clarify the picture of the witnesses' testimony by

bringing it into focus. The court has ruled that the use of obscene or scandalous questions in the

cross-examination shall be prohibited. These are the ones that are either irrelevant to the facts in

question or have the potential to insult or anger the witness who is being cross-examined by the

defence attorney

Types of Witness Examination, together with their respective advantages and disadvantages:

Chief Examiner's Inquiry

Examining a witness who has been summoned by one of the parties is referred to as examination in

chief8. Once the oath is taken and affirmed, this is the first step in the entire examination procedure.

The whole emphasis in this case is on the testimony and evidence of the witnesses. Parties tend to

establish what their case is by narrowing the focus of their discussion to the material facts.


A sophisticated chief examination is capable of identifying a large number of things. In this type of

examination, questions that are considered to be leading ones are not asked. The competency of the

witness is an important consideration that must be kept in mind, and his or her evidence must be

relevant.

When preparing for this examination, it is necessary to adhere to a rule known as the golden rule9,

which states that there must be clarity, outline questions must be prepared, appropriate phrases

must be used, relevant portions must be given precedence, and flexible questions must be given

discourse.

Examining the Evidence in a Cross-Examination

As part of the examination of witnesses, this examination plays an important function, and it is

considered to be one of the most important methods used in determining and acquiring truth10. It is

preceded at the request of the adverse party, and an attempt is made to verify the validity as well as

the credibility of a witness's statements and testimony, with the major goal of this examination

being to verify the veracity and credibility of a witness's statements and testimony. During the

course of this test, questions other than those pertaining to the facts may be asked, but questions

that are deceptive are not permitted to be asked.


Unlike other rights, the right of a party to cross-examine a particular witness is recognised by natural

justice principles as well as other rights common to the legal profession. Because perjury is a

criminal offence in a court of law, the requirement of cross-examination plays an important role in

the process of truth discovery. This procedure of cross-examining the witness results in the inference

being formed that the adverse party has accepted the truthfulness of the statements made, and

there is no room for any subsequent grievance to be raised if this process is not conducted by the

adverse party . For example, if an adverse party is eager to cross-examine but is denied permission

by the court for reasons best known to the court, the evidence in question is deemed not to be

taken into consideration at all 16.

Re-Examination

When a question arises during the course of cross-examination, this type of examination provides an

opportunity for the witness to explain the question. This type of examination is normally limited to

only such questions. Efforts are taken to clarify any expressions used by the witness over the course

of the trial. Additionally, new subjects might be raised, but only after obtaining the necessary

permission from the court, and the opposing party would then be given the opportunity to cross-

examine those points So, to put it another way, the purpose of main examination is witness

examination under oath, the objective of cross examination is to expose truth, and the objective of

re-examination is to remove vagueness. Lead-in questions are not permitted to be asked in chief or

re-examination unless the court grants permission18 to do so, but they are permitted to be asked

during cross-examination.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree