The imperative language used in Sections 5, 60, 64, 136 and 165, Evidence Act, indicates that a Court should, whether objection to evidence if or is not raised by any party, compel observance of the law. It is, therefore, the duty of the Judge to ascertain by a few questions put to each witness at the proper time, whether he is speaking of matters within his own knowledge, or merely of those which he has heard from others; and if the former, what are the means of knowledge. Under Section 165 of the Evidence Act the Judge may, in order to discover or to obtain proper proof of facts question a witness at any time about any fact, relevant or irrelevant, but he should not ordinarily interfere after the examination-in-chief has been finished and question the witness upon points to which the cross-examination will properly be directed, as to do so may tender the subsequent cross-examination ineffective.(2)When a witness is being cross-examined, the Judge should guide himself by the provisions of Sections 146, 148,151 and 152 of the Evidence Act, and disallow any question which appears to him to be improper. He should see that much is not made of trifling discrepancies, that the examination is not protracted beyond reasonable limits even if the questions put be logically relevant, and that the witness is not subject to questions which merely invite repetition of the story which he has already given in his examination-in-chief in the hope that he will change it in the repetition. In this connection Section 136 of the Evidence Act should be borne in mind, as it empowers the Judge to ask a party proposing to give evidence in what manner the alleged fact, if proved, will be relevant. The cross-examiner must not be allowed to bully or take unfair advantage of the witness. Use should be made of the disciplinary power conferred by Section 150 when its exercise appears to be called for.(3)While it is necessary for the Judge to check random and pointless questioning be should be careful not to frustrate a skilful cross-examination by interposing when the draft of the questions is not immediately apparent and some questions are repeated. He should endeavour to follow the line and purpose of the cross-examination closely and should only ask the examiner to explain relevancy of a line of enquiry when it obviously possesses no point or bearing upon the case.(4)A witness may be questioned in cross-examination not only on the subject of enquiry but upon any other subject, however remote, for the purpose of testing the credibility, his memory, his means of knowledge, or his accuracy. The moment it appears that a question is being asked which does not bear upon the issue or give promise of helping the Court or to estimate the value of the witness's testimony, it is the duty of the Court to interfere as well as to protect the witness from what then become an injustice or insult so as to prevent the time of the Court from being wasted. The Court should also prevent any evidence being given to contradict a witness in contravention of Section 153 of the Evidence Act.
