Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

13. A Panchnama can also be treated as a note or a record made by the Panch witness to refresh his memory. Section 159 of the Evidence Act provides as follows:

A witness may, while under examination, refresh his memory by referring to any writing made, by himself at the time of the transaction concerning which he is questioned, or so soon afterwards that the Court considers it likely that the transaction was at that time fresh in his memory.
The witness may also refer to any such writing made by any other person, and read by the witness within the time aforesaid, if when he read it he knew it to be correct.
Whenever a witness may refresh his memory by referring to any document, he may, with the permission of the Court, refer to a copy of such document:
Provided the Court be satisfied that there is sufficient reason for die non-production of the original.
An expert may refresh his memory by reference to professional treatises.
In view of Section 159 of the Evidence Act, even If the Panchnama is not written by the Panch himself but by another person, Section 159 Evidence Act, would apply to it provided the Panchnama was read by the witness within the time mentioned in Section 159, Evidence Act and if when he read it he knew it to be correct. In such a case the Panchnama can be used by a witness to refresh his memory as laid down in Section 159 of the Evidence Act. When the writing is used by a witness to refresh his memory, the provisions of Sections 160 and 161 of the Evidence Act also would apply. Section 160 of (sic)Act provides as follows:
A witness may also testify to facts mentioned in any such document as is mentioned in Section 159, although h@ has no specific recollection of the facts themselves if he is sure that the facts were correctly recorded in the document.
It is also clear from this section that in the case of a writing used by the witness to refresh his memory, the writing itself cannot be admitted in evidence. Even in cases where the witness has no specific recollection of the facts the witness has to testify to the facts mentioned in the document used by him to refresh his memory. It is therefore clear from this section that the writing used by the witness to refresh his memory cannot be admitted in evidence. But, as provided in Section 161 of the Evidence Act, any such writing must be produced and shown to the adverse party if he requires it, and such party may, cross-examine the witness thereupon, and in cross-examination the adverse party may prove the writing to contradict the evidence of the witness. Therefore, if a Panchnama is a statement made in the course of the police investigation under Chapter XIV, Cr.P.C. then it would fall within the scope of Section 162, Cr.P.C. If the Panchnama is a note, a writing or a record made by the witness to refresh his memory, it can be used as provided by Sections 159, 160 and 161 of the Evidence Act, and the document itself cannot be produced in evidence by the party calling the witness, 'finis view has been taken in Mohanlal Babaibhai v. Emperor 43 Bom LR 163 : AIR 1941 Bom 149 where it was observed by Sir John Beaumont, C.J. at pp. 166 a d 167 (of Bom LR) : (at p. 151 of AIR) as follows:

17. The contention that a panchanama being a document can be proved, is not correct. Evidence may be oral Or documentary. Documentary evidence is to prove the contents of a document, Seen the question is what the contents of the document are But when the question is what a witness has seen or what he has heard etc., the evidence must be oral and must be direct. When the question is what the witness has seen, he must say what he has seen. There is no question of documentary evidence to prove the fact which a witness has seen and to prove that the witness has seen that fact. A document may be used for contradicting the witness^ but when the question is what the witness has' seen, there must be direct oral evidence as to what he has seen. Sometimes, a witness's memory may be weak; tile witness may refresh his memory by referring to any writing made by himself at the time of the transaction concerning this question as provided in Section 159 of the Evidence Act. The witness may also refer to any such writing made by any other person, and read by the witness within the time referred to in Section 159, if when he read it he knew it to be correct. The very fact that a provision is made for a witness for refreshing his memory by referring to certain documents in order to prove certain facts makes it clear that the evidence of such facts trust be given by the oral evidence of the plaintiff and not by producing a document.