Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(b)In the same Explanation-1 to Rule 14(b)(iv) of the Rules, it is explained that if a person is acquitted due to the fact that the complainant had "turned hostile", then the said person is not eligible for appointment. Whether a person turns hostile or not is not in the hands of the accused. It is the wisdom of the witness. When the witness gives evidence before the court on oath, he is presumed to tell only the truth, whereas, the statement made by him under Section 161 Cr.P.C., which is an unsigned statement, cannot have any authenticity or evidentiary value. Because the said witness has not given evidence in tune with the earlier statement said to have been given by him, he is cross-examined by the prosecution. Similarly, if his evidence goes against the prosecution, there also he is cross-examined by the prosecution. In the Evidence Act, there is no provision to declare a witness as hostile or to enable the witness to turn hostile. What all that contain in Section 154 of the Evidence Act is to cross-examine the witness by the Public Prosecutor, after getting permission from the Court. The accused cannot be, in any manner, held responsible for the witness not supporting the case of the prosecution and therefore the accused cannot be penalised on that score, by disqualifying him from entering into police service. Otherwise, it will be, as though, the accused has to go after the complainant requesting him not to turn hostile and to say some falsehood against him in the court so that he could get honourable acquittal for the purpose of entering into the police service. This aspect was not placed before the Full Bench.