Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 35 (0.26 seconds)
Alok Debroy And Anr. vs State Of Assam on 4 November, 2003 cites

State Of U.P vs Ramesh Prasad Misra And Anr on 13 August, 1996

The necessary pre-condition, however, for allowing a party to cross examine its own witnesses by declaring him hostile is the satisfaction of the court that statements of the witness exhibit an element of hostility or that he has resiled from earlier statements made before some authority or when the court is satisfied that the witness is not speaking the truth and that it would be necessary to cross examine him to elicit the truth. This satisfaction, to start with would have some bearing on the acceptability of the evidence of that witness and it is only after assessing the intrinsic worth of his testimony with utmost care and caution that either the prosecution or the defence may rely on any part thereof which is consistent with its case. The probative value of the evidence of a hostile witness therefore would depend on its quality and the confidence it generates in the mind of the court after being subjected to a close scrutiny. If the testimony of such a witness placed in juxtaposition to the other evidence on record does not appear to be consistent and acceptable the same cannot be relied upon. In the case in hand, as discussed above, the evidence of PW 6 by applying the aforementioned tests, cannot be accepted in support of the defence version. While we respectfully subscribe to the legal principle laid down in the above decisions, we are unable to hold that those further the case of the defence in the present facts and circumstances.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 334 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next