LAW OF EVIDENCE

The entire body of law of the land may be divided into two branches – The
substantive law and the adjective law (Procedural law). The substantive law defines
the rights, duties and liabilities of persons, whereas adjective law defines the
procedure, pleadings and proof by which the substantive law is applied in practice.
The law of evidence being a procedural law is the basis of administration of justice.
This unit explains the basic principles of law of evidence in the context of Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 with reference to criminal administration of justice. The writer
has taken every care to avoid legal jargons, reproduction of sections and terms purely
technical in nature. This will help the reader to understand the general principles of
law of evidence.
OBJECTIVES
After reading this unit, you should be able to:
• introduce the basic principles of law of evidence to the student of criminal
administration of justice;
• explain the need to study the principles of law of evidence;
• organise and present the rules of evidence in a systematic manner;
• explain the nexus between the Law of Evidence and Criminal Justice System;
• enable the reader to understand, how the principles of evidence are used as
basic tools in administration of justice for fact finding; and
• • discuss important principles of law with respect to relevancy, admissibility,
examination and proof of facts.
MEANING AND CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE The word evidence is
derived from the Latin word evidare which means to show clearly, to make
clearly and to discover clearly. In general parlance evidence means collection of
facts produced by the parties either orally or in the written form before the court
of law to prove the existence or non-existence of disputed facts. In legal sense
evidence means and includes:
1) All statements made by the witnesses and permitted by the court as oral
evidence, and
2) All documents produced by the parties for inspection of the court are known
as documentary evidence. The following definitions may be helpful to the reader
to understand the classification of evidences under law:
Oral Evidence: Personal acknowledgement of facts by words, verbal statements,
visible representation, gestures or signs or any other means which can be
communicated to the court.
Documentary Evidence: Any matter expressed or described upon any substance
by means of letters, figures or marks for the purpose of recording is called
document. Electronic records like floppy, CD, memory stick also come under the
definition of document. When a document is called for the inspection of the court
it is known as documentary evidence.
Primary Evidence: When the original document is produced before the court of
law for its inspection, it is called primary evidence.
Secondary Evidence: If the law permits the parties to produce the copies of the
original in place of primary evidence it is known as secondary evidence.
Direct Evidence: When the fact is directly attested by witnesses, things or
documents is called as direct evidence.
Circumstantial Evidence: Means information dealing with related surroundings
or circumstances. It is an evidence of circumstances or situations leading to the
happening of the principal fact.
Hearsay Evidence: Any information received by a person with the help of others
and not through his direct senses is called hearsay evidence.
BASIC LEGAL TERMS Fact: It means something that has actually happened.
Section 3 of Indian Evidence Act defines fact it means and includes: 1) Any thing
or state of things
Basic Principles of Law of Evidence or relation of things, capable of being
perceived by the senses;
2) Any mental condition of which any person is conscious. The above section
refers to both physical facts and psychological facts. Physical facts can be
perceived by the senses. Ex. Seeing, smelling, hearing, tasting and perceiving.
Where as psychological facts show idea, intention, knowledge, ill will, etc. Fact
in issue: Any fact from which either by itself or in connection with the other facts,
the existence, non-existence, nature or extent of any right, liability or disability,
asserted or denied in any suit or proceedings necessarily follows: Ex.: Facts
basically disputed between the parties, facts asserted or denied by the parties
which facts deal with rights and liabilities of the parties, points of issues between
the parties, matters of investigation, charges framed in the court of law, guilt of
the accused, etc.
Relevant: One fact is said to be relevant to another, when one is connected with
the other in any of the ways mention in the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act
relating to relevancy of facts. Relevancy means relationship between two facts.
This relevancy may be logical or legal. The Indian Evidence Act permits all
legally relevant facts admissible in the court of law. Proved: means shown to be
true by means of facts. A fact is said to be proved when after considering the
matter before it, the court believes that the fact exists. Ex.: A Kills B and pleads
insanity as defence. Insanity is proved by producing a certificate from competent
medical doctor.
Disproved: means to prove something to be false. A fact is said to be disproved
if after considering the matters before it, the court believes that it does not exist.
Ex.: A Kills B and pleads insanity as defence. Insanity is disproved because the
certificate produced from a doctor is false.
Not proved: A fact is said to be not proved when it is neither proved nor
disproved. A fact is said to be not proved when neither its existence nor non
existence is proved. It indicates a state of mind between the two, proved and
disproved. It negatives both proof and disproof. Ex.: A Kills B and pleads insanity
as defence. Insanity is neither proved nor disproved because no certificate is
produced. Please answer the following self assessment question: Self Assessment
PRESUMPTIONS
The presumption denotes things taken for granted or an hypothesis drawn on the
basis of proper reasoning. Presumption is the result of human experience and
reason as applied to the common course of events in ordinary way of life. In fact
Principles of Criminal Jurisprudence presumption has no place in proof of facts
in the administration of justice. However, there are certain facts well settled and
known to the general public which need no proof. Ex.: A man, who is in
possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is either the thief or has received
the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he can account for his possession.
Obviously presumptions reduce the burden of the court in investigation,
examination and proof of facts. For this reason the Indian Evidence Act permitted
three important presumptions namely may presume, shall presume and
conclusive proof. May presume: Whenever it is provided by the Indian Evidence
Act the court may presume a fact, as if it is proved unless and until it is disproved.
It is a discretionary presumption, rebuttable presumption and presumption of fact,
which can be modified, altered or changed. Ex.: Presumption as to abetment of
suicide by a married woman. There is presumption against the husband and
family members if a married woman commits suicide as a result of abetment by
her husband or relatives of her husband within period of 7 years from the date of
marriage. Shall presume: Whenever it is directed by Indian Evidence Act the
court shall presume a fact, as if it is proved unless and until it is disproved. This
is a presumption of law, mandatory in nature but rebuttable. Ex.: When the
question before the court of law is that a person committed dowry death of
woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected
to cruelty or harassment for dowry, the court shall presume that such person had
caused the dowry death. Another example, if a woman is subject to custodial rape
the court shall presume that she did not consent to the act. Conclusive proof:
Whenever it is declared by Indian Evidence Act that a particular fact is a
conclusive proof, the court shall not allow any evidence to disprove such fact.
Ex.: If the question is, A and B are husband and wife and when divorced decree
is produced, the court shall conclusively presume that they are no longer husband
and wife and no evidence is permitted to disprove it.
RELEVANCY OF FACTS — AN OVERVIEW The Indian Evidence Act under
Chapter-II has incorporated a number of provisions to govern relevancy of facts
in a suit or proceedings. The purpose and object of this chapter is to separate the
grain from chaff. This chapter deals with the rules of relevancy and admissibility
of evidences in order to save the time of the court. Important relevant facts
explained in this chapter are; res gestae, cause and effect, motive, preparation,
conduct, explanatory facts, introductory facts, things said or done in conspiracy
cases, right or custom, state of mind, bodily feelings, admissions, confessions,
dying declaration, expert’s opinion, character, judgments, etc. Since the module
is relating to criminal administration of justice the present unit is confined to rules
relating to relevancy, admissibility, examination and proof of facts only in
criminal cases. The following two diagrams enables the reader to understand the
relevancy of facts under Indian law. 53 Basic Principles of Law of Evidence
RELEVANCY OF FACTS (SECTIONS 5-55) Basic Principles of relevancy of
facts in criminal justice system: Doctrine of res gestae: It is a Latin Word, which
means; “things said and done in the course of a transaction”. In Judicial enquiry
it is necessary to consider a number of facts to decide the nature of right or
liability. The facts may be extending over a period of time to different places. The
collection of these facts, explaining these facts are called res-gestae. In other
words res-gestae means relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction. In
any transaction the surrounding facts of the main fact is (fact in issue) usually
known as res gestae. Ex.: A is accused of the murder of B by beating. Whatever
was said or done by A or B or the by-standers at the time of beating or so shortly
before or after the beating forms the part of same transaction, so they are relevant
facts. Motive: Motive means a psychological fact that moves a person to do an
act in a particular way. In criminal law mens rea (intention) is an important fact
to establish the guilt of an accused person. On the other hand there is always a
question as to why an offence is committed by the accused?. What are the
motivating factors leading to commission of such offence. This is very important
if the case is going to be decided purely on the basis of circumstantial evidence
and granting sentence or imposing fine. Preparation: There are four stages of
crime namely intention, preparation, attempt and commission of an act.
Preparation is the stage to design the plan and execute it. Evidence which shows
that the accused made preparation to commit a crime is relevant and admissible.
Conduct: Conduct means what a person thinks of himself and behaves. Conduct
is an external behavior of a person. There is nexus between the conduct of the
accused and the crime committed. Conduct like avoiding arrest, resistance to
arrest, escape from the custody, running away from the scene of offence, etc.
amounts to the conduct of the accused and is quite relevant in criminal
proceedings. Identification parade: The evidence of Identification parade
proceedings conducted for the purpose of establishing the identify of accused is
relevant evidence at the time of trial of the accused person. The object of
conducting Identification Parade is to test the truthfulness of the witnesses and
his capability to identify an unknown person whom he has seen only once. When
the accused person is arrested on the basis of physical features given by the
eyewitness, police arrange the test identification parade. Test Identification
parade is conducted in presence of Judicial Magistrate and the police have to
leave the scene to ensure the free and fair conduct of identification parade.
Arrested person will be placed between the other persons who have same physical
characters of accused as far as possible. Then the Magistrate calls the eyewitness
to identify the accused person, whom he had seen while committing the crime. If
the eyewitness identifies the accused, he picks up the person whom he had seen,
while committing the crime, the Magistrate records to that effect and he
completes the proceedings. The eyewitness who has identified the accused will
be produced in court at the time of trial to identify the accused person again.
Conspiracy : When two persons agree to do an illegal act or an act which is not
illegal but by illegal means, such agreement is called a criminal conspiracy. The
general principle is that no person can be made liable for the acts of other. But in
a criminal conspiracy persons who take part in conspiracy are deemed to be
mutual agents for the purpose of commission of an offence. Here anything said,
done or written by one partner shall be binding on all other partners as an
important evidence in the court of law. Alibi: Alibi means “elsewhere”. It is the
defence of the accused person that he was elsewhere at the time of commission
of offence and therefore his physical presence at the place of offence is highly
impossible. Ex. A is charged with murder of B which took place at Hyderabad
but the fact is A was in Delhi on the same day. A can take the plea of alibi i.e. he
was elsewhere at the time of commission of crime. But the burden of proof lies
on A to produce evidence in this regard to establish his innocence.
CONFESSIONS
The word confession is a biblical term which denotes accepting one’s own sins
to the heavenly father. In criminal justice system confession means to admit a
fault or crime. This is acknowledgement of one’s own guilt. In fact it is self
harming statement in criminal cases. Ex.: A is charged with murder of B. Here A
makes a statement that he committed the murder. This admission of crime
amounts to confession. The statement of confession may be recorded by any
person except the police. When confession is made to Magistrate, it is called
formal statement of confession having a good evidentiary value. The reason is
that under Section 164 CrPC the Magistrate shall take every care and caution
while recording the confession statement. The evidentiary value of confession
statement depends upon its veracity. The legal aspects of confession can be
explained as follows: • No person accused of an offence shall be compelled to
give a witness against himself. Otherwise it amounts to testimonial compulsion.
• Confession should be made voluntarily. If it is made by inducement, threat or
promise it is not relevant.
• Confession made to the police officer shall not be proved against the accused
person.
• Confession made under the custody of police shall not be established against
the accused.
• Confession made by one accused person is also relevant against the co-accused
provided the confession should make both the parties liable.
Exceptions
• If any inducement, threat or promise is made to record the confession, by a
person other than police, in such case in the opinion of court, if such inducement,
threat or promise has been fully removed then it is relevant.
• When a confession is made under the promise of secrecy is relevant.
• When confession is made under deception or under the state of drunk is relevant.
Basic Principles of Law of Evidence
• When any fact is discovered in consequence of information received from the
accused person while he is in the custody of police, so much of such information
whether it is amounts to confession or not as relates distantly to the facts thereby
discovered, may be proved.
Magistrate’s duty in recording confession
• He shall explain that accused person need not make or be bound by his
confession.
• He shall not record the statement unless he satisfies that the statement seems to
be voluntarily.
• If a person is not willing to make the confession the Magistrate is not supposed
to handover the person to the police custody.
• The Magistrate shall write a foot note that the statement of confession is
recorded and read in the presence of the accused person.
• If the Magistrate has no power to take up that case, the recorded confession
shall be forwarded to the concerned judge for inquiry and trial.
DYING DECLARATION
A dying declaration is called leterm mortem which means the words said before
death. Statement of a dead person before his death explaining the cause of death
or any circumstances leading to cause of his death is a dying declaration. In a
number of homicide or suicide cases dying declaration is of vital evidence. Some
times it is prima facie evidence and some times it is corroborative evidence. The
reason for admissibility of dying declaration is on the presumption that no person
shall lie on his death bed. In English law dying declaration is admissible only in
criminal cases, where as in India it is admissible in both civil and criminal cases,
provided the death comes into question. Before taking the dying declaration as
an admissible evidence the following conditions to be satisfied. 1) The declarant
must have died. 2) The cause of his death must be in question. 3) The declarant
must explain the cause of his death or circumstances which resulted in his death.
4) The declaration must be a complete statement. 5) The person making the
statement must be in sound mind.
Principles of Criminal Jurisprudence The courts in India evolved certain
principles and made some propositions for effective use of dying declarations as
evidences. Some of the propositions read as under:
• Dying declaration may be the sole basis of conviction depending upon the
circumstances it is recorded.
• Dying declaration may be made to any person like Magistrate, police, doctor or
relatives of injured person. But if it is recorded by Magistrate, it will have a
greater evidentiary value.
• The Dying declaration must be recorded in the exact words used by the declarant
to avoid possibility of several interpretations.
• If the dying declaration is recorded immediately after the occurrence of an
incident i.e causing of injuries, it can avoid the influence of the other members
of the family in making of the statement.
• The declarant must have an opportunity to identify the accused person by giving
particulars like name, address, physical features, relationship, etc.
• When there are several dying declarations made to different persons, they must
be identical and similar in respect of substantive part of the declaration.
• Incomplete dying declarations are not allowed as evidences.
 • If it is proved that a portion of dying declaration is false evidence and the other
part of dying declaration has no meaning in admission.
• Dying declaration should be made in a fit state of mind. There is no prescribed
form for making a dying declaration. Therefore, it may be oral or in written form.
The above guidelines make the criminal justice system more effective and
efficient in recording and admitting dying declarations as substantive evidences
for the purpose of investigation. It can be said that judicial precedents cannot be
applied in all situations because every case and circumstance in each case varies.
EXPERT’S OPINION
The general principle of law of evidence is that every witness is witness of fact
but not witness of an opinion. Presumptions, opinions or hypothesis have no place
in the administration of justice unless the law is specific. Another principle is that
the opinion of witness should be excluded. Witness is allowed to speak about the
happening of an incident but not his opinion about the incident. After taking the
evidence from both the parties it is the court which has to form an opinion about
the existence and non-existence of facts to decide a case. However, to a judge it
is very difficult to form an opinion on every matter since he has certain human
limitations. He cannot understand certain matters which are highly technical in
nature and where the special means of knowledge is required. Under these
circumstances the Indian Evidence Act allows the judges to take an opinion of
experts to assist the court in functioning of justice delivery system.
Basic Principles of Law of Evidence An expert is a person who is specially
skilled in a particular art or trade or business or profession. According to law an
expert is a person specially skilled in foreign law, science or art, identity of
handwriting and identity of finger impressions. The word science represents a
systematic study of knowledge of any discipline in the universe which includes
biological science, physical science, social science, behavioural science, medical
science, forensic science, DNA finger printing, study relating to fire arms, etc.
An expert opinion definitely to assists the administration of justice specially in
homicide cases, suicide cases, rape cases, maternity, paternity and virginity
disputes, forged documents and other vital medical issues. When there is a
conflict between opinion given by two experts, it will be referred to third opinion.
Experts opinion is always a corroborative evidence and rarely a substantive
evidence.
RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER :
Character is a combination of certain qualities of a person such as nature,
temperament, behavior, honesty, goodwill, reputation, etc. Generally this is a
public opinion about a person. In civil cases character of the parties to the case
has no importance, but in criminal cases the character of the accused person is
essential in order to assess the gravity of situation and grant sentence to the
accused. For example, A files suit against B for recovery of loan from B on the
basis of the promissory note. Here the character of B is irrelevant. Suppose X
filed a petition against her husband Z for dissolution of marriage on the grounds
that Z is living in adultery. In such case the character of the husband has to be
proved to grant divorce. In criminal proceedings the accused person’s previous
good character is always relevant but not his bad character. However the accused
person claims that he has good character then the defence counsel may show
evidences of bad character of the accused person. The court of law in criminal
administration of justice takes bad character in certain specified offences like
habitual offenders in gang decoities, offences relating to counterfeit of coins and
Govt. stamps, offence relating to property, etc.
BURDEN OF PROOF
All the relevant facts admitted by the court must be proved by evidence, i.e.
either by statement of witnesses or admissions or confessions of the parties or by
production of the documents. The important question is on whom a burden lies
to produce evidence and prove the relevant facts? Generally burden of proof
Principles of Criminal Jurisprudence lies on the person who approaches the court
to give judgment in his favour. The expression burden of proof has two different
things. It means 1) The party is required to prove an allegation before judgement
is given in his favour. 2) It also means that in a contested case one of the two
contesting parties has to introduce evidence. In criminal cases the burden of proof
always lies on the prosecution. It is the duty of the prosecutor to establish the
guilt of the accused person beyond all reasonable doubts. There are five basic
principles of criminal law in respect of burden of proof. They are as under: •
Accused person should be presumed to be innocent until his guilt is proved
beyond all reasonable doubts. • Charge against the accused should be proved
beyond all reasonable doubts. • Benefit of doubt should always be given to the
accused. • If two views on one fact are possible the court must accept the view
which is favourable to the accused. • corps delecti (Commission of the offence)
should be established. Burden of proof and the Indian Evidence Act: The Act
evolved certain principles in respect of burden of proof and burden to produce
evidence in a case or proceedings. They are summarized as under: • He who asks
the court to deliver a judgment in his favour must prove the case. • Burden of
proof lies on that person who would fail if no evidence is given in both the sides.
• Burden of proof as to a particular fact lies on that person who wishes the court
to believe in the existence of that fact. • Burden of proof lies on the accused
person, if he claims general exceptions under Indian Penal Code. • Burden of
proof lies on a person if he has special means of knowledge about a particular
fact. • Burden of proof as to relationship in case of landlord and tenants lies on
that person who says such relationship does not exist. • Burden of proof as to
ownership of the property lies on that person who says that the other person is
not the owner. • Burden of proof in respect of a transaction in good faith lies on
a person who is in the status of active confidence on the other person. • If a child
born during marriage or within 280 days after dissolution of marriage, it shall be
presumed that the child is legitimate of that marriage unless non-access is proved.
• If a married woman dies by committing suicide within 7 years of marriage
because of alleged cruelty of the husband or relatives of the husband, the court
may presume that the suicide is by abetment of those relatives. 59 Basic
Principles of Law of Evidence • If a married woman dies within 7 years of the
marriage, in connection with the demand of dowry, the court shall presume that
the death was caused by her husband or his relatives. Therefore, the burden of
proof lies on those relatives to prove that it was not a dowry death. • In custodial
rape cases the court shall presume that there is no consent to the sexual
intercourse from the victim.(woman)
COMPETENCY OF WITNESSES
A very important question is who is the competent witness to be testified.
According to the law of evidence every person is a competent witness unless he
is disqualified by the judge on certain reasons. A Judge may disqualify a person
as a witness on the ground of his extreme old age or tender age or decease to the
mind or body etc. A child, lunatic, blind persons, deaf and dumb person are also
considered as competent witnesses. In civil and criminal proceedings wife and
husband are competent witnesses against other. However there are certain
persons who shall not be compelled to give witness before the court of law. They
are as under: • No Judge or Magistrate shall be compelled to answer questions as
to his own conduct or anything which came to his knowledge in court except
under the special orders of superior courts. • No person who is or has been
married shall be compelled nor permitted to disclose any communication made
to him during marriage by the person to whom he is or has been married. This
privilege is intended to ensure matrimonial harmony which is available even after
dissolution of marriage. However, when there is a dispute between wife and
husband this privilege may not be available. • No witness shall be permitted to
give evidence from the unpublished records relating to the affairs of the state
without the consent of the head of the department. • No Magistrate or police
officer can be compelled to say as to where and how he got information in relation
to the commission of offence. • No public officer shall be compelled to disclose
communications made to him in official confidence when he considers that the
public interest would suffer by its disclosure. 60 Principles of Criminal
Jurisprudence • No barrister, attorney, pleader, vakil, his clerks or servants and
interpreters even after the employment has ceased shall be permitted to disclose
any communication made to him by the client. In the same manner the advise
given by him to his client is also protected. • No person taking legal advice shall
be compelled to disclose to the court any confidential communication between
him and his legal professional advisor. • No witness, who is not a party to the suit,
shall be compelled to produce his title deeds to any property. • No one shall be
compelled to produce any document which is in his possession. But if he consents
to the production of document it can be produced by him. • Witness will not be
excused, from answering the questions on the ground the answers will
incriminate him.
ACCOMPLICE :
An accomplice is one of the guilty associates or partners in the commission of
the crime or who in someway or other is connected with the commission of crime
or who admits that he has a conscious hand in the commission of a crime. Ex.:
An abettor, a person who assists in the concealment of the crime, a bribe giver,
an approver and a receiver of stolen property. Categories of Accomplices : An
accomplice is a person who participated in the same offence. The participation
may be done in various stages, they are as follows: 1) Principle of the first and
second degree. 2) Accessories before the fact. 3) Accessories after the fact. 1)
Principle of the first Degree: A principle of the first degree is one who actually
commits the crime. Principle of the Second Degree: A principle of the second
degree is a person who is present and assists in the preparation of the crime. 2)
Accessories before the facts: Persons who abet, insight procure or counsel for the
commission of crime are known as accessories before the facts. A person who is
not present at scene of offence but who helps someone in doing it. Accessories
before the crime means one who instigates the commission of crime. Here he
remains absent while the crime is being committed. 3) Accessories after the fact
: Means one who aids a criminal after the commission of crime. It means a person
who harbour the criminal, who shields, who protects or who assists the criminal
from escaping the law. Accomplice evidence is admitted in view of necessity.
Now it is a well settled law that the courts should not convict a person on the
basis of accomplice unless it is supported by other corroborative evidence. The
justified reasons may be that accomplice is likely to speak falsehood in order to
shift his guilty to others or with a hope of getting excuse in his favour from the
prosecution.
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Evidence In a suit of proceedings the court issues the summons to the witnesses
for appearance before it. The trial commences when the parties are present with
their advocates and witnesses. The court orders for commencement of the trial
and proceedings. When a person comes as a witness his name, age, address,
occupation and other relevant personal information will be recorded on oath in
the witness box. The answers given by the witnesses are recorded by the court.
In civil cases there are two parties known as plaintiff and defendant. In criminal
cases they are called as complainant / prosecution and accused / defence. In civil
cases the advocate for the plaintiff explains the fact and introduces evidences in
support of his claim. In criminal cases prosecution explains the charges against
the accused persons and introduces the evidences to prove the charges. In
criminal cases the accused person is presumed to be innocent therefore the burden
of proof lies on the prosecution. There are three stages of examination of
witnesses under the law of evidence. They are examination-in-chief, cross
examination and re-examination.
Examination-in-chief : Examination of party or parties or witness by their own
advocate is called examination-in-chief. The object of this examination is to give
the party a chance to place the facts before the court and explain all facts which
needs proof. There are three rules regarding the examination-in-chief. They are:
a) the question in examination in chief must be related to facts-in issue or relevant
fact b) no leading question can be asked c) the witness can give evidence only
relating to facts but not of law.
Cross examination: After completion of examination-in-chief the witness will be
cross examined by the advocate of the opposite party. This stage is known as
cross examination. The cross examination an opportunity is available to the
opposite party to elicit or extract the truth from the witnesses. It is a very
important stage and process to test the correctness of the witness. Naturally, there
are four objectives to be fulfilled by cross examination. They are: a) to extract
the truth b) to destroy the witness of the opposite party c) to weaken opposite
party’s witness d) to establish that his witness is correct. Re-examination: After
the witness is cross examined by the opposite party, the party who calls him may
examine him again. This is known as re-examination. As a matter of right re-
examination cannot be done, it can be done only with the permission of the court.
The very purpose of re-examination is to remove any doubt which arose in cross
examination and enable the witness to clarify any contradiction. General rules of
examination of witnesses: • Witness shall not be compelled to give witness
against himself. • Unreasonable questions cannot be asked. • Whether the
question is proper or improper shall be decided by the court. • Questions
intending to corroborate the facts may be asked. • Indecent and scandalous
questions may not be asked unless it is an issue. • Questions intended to insult or
annoy shall not be asked. • Questions contradicting the witness or test his veracity
may be asked.
• Leading questions (suggested answer in the question) should not be asked in
examination-in-chief, if it is objected by other side. • The witness may be cross
examined as to his previous written statement. • Witness may be allowed to
refresh his memory with the help of any document. • In cross examination the
credit of the accused may be impeached by putting question to prove that his
unworthy or bribed witness and he is inconsistent in his statements