Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

13. It was vehemently urged by the learned Counsel for the appellant that this witness had been cross-examined by the public prosecutor himself and thereby it appears that the prosecution itself does not rely upon the testimony of this witness. His evidence must, therefore, be discarded. We have carefully examined this aspect of the matter. It appears that at one time, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had taken the view that "when a witness, who has been called by the prosecution is permitted to be cross-examined on behalf of the prosecution, the result of that course being adopted is to discredit that witness altogether and not merely to get rid of a part of his testimony", as has been observed by his Lordship P. N. Bhagwati, J., as he then was, in Jagir Singh v. The State (Delhi) 1975 SCC (Cri) 129 : (1975 Cri LJ 1009), sitting with his Lordship N. L. Untwalia, J. This view has since then been watered down by the later authorities of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in some of which these two Hon'ble Judges were parties to the judgment, e.g. Sat Paul v. Delhi Administration 1976 SCC (Cri) 160 : (1976 Cri LJ 295) in which the leading judgment was of Hon'ble Justice R. S. Sarkaria and Hon'ble Justice P. N. Bhagwati was sitting with him. In this judgment after referring to Jagir Singh's case (supra) their Lorsdhips observed as under (at pp. 309, 310 of Cri LJ) :--

14. Then in Bhagwan Singh v. The State of Haryana, 1976 SCC (Cri) 7 : (1976 Cri LJ 203), to which both Hon'ble Justice P.N. Bhagwati and Hon'ble Justice Untwalia were members along with Hon'ble Justice P. K. Goswami, it was observed by his Lordship Goswami on behalf of the Court as under (at p. 205 of Cri LJ) :--

"But the fact that the court gave permission to the prosecution to cross-examine his own witness, thus characterising him as, what is described as a hostile witness, does not completely efface his evidence. The evidence remains admissible in the trial and there is no legal bar to base a conviction upon his testimony if corroborated by other reliable evidence."