Meaning of "Examination of Witness": The examination of a witness

involves examination-in-chief, cross-examination, and re-examination. It is

essential for a witness to be allowed to be cross-examined and re-examined.
However, if the adverse party is denied permission to cross-examine or re-
examine, the examination is incomplete. Section 137 defines these terms,
while Section 138 regulates the order of examination. The purpose of
examination is to formally interrogate a witness, critically test facts, and
investigate to form a judgment.

137. EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF. The examination of a witness by the party

who calls him shall be called his examination-in-chief.Cross-examination.
The examination of a witness by the adverse party shall be called his cross-
examination.Re-examination. The examination of a witness, subsequent to
the cross-examination by the party who called him, shall be called his re-
examination.

There are three stages in examination of a witness, viz.:

(1) Examination-in-chief (2) Cross-examination (3) Re-examination.

(1) EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF. Section 137 says that the examination of a
witness by the party who calls him in his examination-in-chief. This is also
known as direct examination. Witnesses shall be first examined-in-chief,
then if the adverse party so desires, cross-examined and then if the party
calling him so desires, re-examined. The object of the examination-in-chief is
to make the witness depose to what he has been called by the party calling
him to prove. In other words, the object of this examination is to get from
the witness all material facts within his knowledge relating to the party's
case. It must be confined to the relevant facts and no leading questions can
be asked except with the permission of the court.

A witness is appointed by a party to testify in a court case, giving an

oath or affirmation. The party then examines the witness to extract all
relevant material facts to support their case. This examination, also known
as direct examination, aims to elicit the truth and prove the facts in favor of
the party calling the witness. The witness must provide relevant facts and no
leading questions can be asked without court permission. Evidence of fact
only is allowed, and the witness must speak to facts, not opinions,
inferences, or beliefs. Leading questions can only be asked with court
permission.

(2) CROSS-EXAMINATION. Section 137 states that the examination of a

witness by the adverse party is called his cross-examination.The object of
cross-examination is to get at the truth. It is the greatest legal engine ever
invented for the discovery of truth. "The objects of cross-examination are to
 impeach the accuracy, credibility, and general value of the evidence given
in examination-in-chief to sift the facts already stated by the witnesses, to
detect, and expose discrepancies, or to elicit suppressed facts which will
support the cases of cross-examining party"-Powell.

A witness examination is a legal process that requires a witness to be first

examined-in-chief. If a prosecution does not examine its witness and offers it
for cross-examination, it is considered abandoning one's own witness, which
is not warranted by law. Cross-examination is not allowed without the
foundation of examination-in-chief, as it affects the credibility of the
prosecution case. After the opposite party completes the examination-in-
chief, they have the right to cross-examine the witness. The opposite party
cannot call their own witness for cross-examination. Cross-examination
follows immediately upon the examination-in-chief unless the court
postpones it.

Evidence on Affidavit: A person giving evidence on an affidavit can only

be subjected to cross-examination based on the facts stated in the affidavit.
It is not necessary for them to depose in examination-in-chief, as their
affidavit is a deposition. The right to cross-examination is not only a
statutory right but also a principle of natural justice.

Evidence cannot be read against a party until it has been subjected to cross-
examination or an opportunity for cross-examination. If a witness does not
appear to subject themselves to cross-examination, their evidence becomes
valueless and must be excluded from consideration.

In Gopal Saren v. Satyanarayan, AIR 1989 SC 1141, it was held that if

a witness after being examined upto the stage of examination does not
subject to cross-examination in spite of the order of the Court, the
examination-in-chief cannot be relied upon.

Effect of not cross-examining: In court, if a witness's testimony is not

demolished due to a lack of cross-examination, it is assumed that the other
party accepts the truth. However, there are five exceptions: (1) when the
witness had notice, (2) when the story is romantic or incredible, (3) when the
non-examination is due to delicacy, (4) when counsel suggests the witness is
not cross-examined to save time, and (5) when multiple witnesses are
examined on the same points. If the examination-in-chief yields clear,
conclusive, or unimpeachable evidence, the adverse party may cross-
examine to strengthen and confirm it. However, they will generally not
cross-examine a witness whose evidence they admit or cannot potentially
harm their case. Once the opposite party does not conclude cross-
examination, they cannot use the opportunity in subsequent proceedings.
In UOI v. T.R. Verma, AIR 1957 SC 882, it was ruled that if a witness's
deposition does not mention a lack of cross-examination, it can be
concluded that the party entitled to cross-examine did not cross-examine.
Courts can still assess the veracity of witnesses without cross-examination,
and the fact that the opposite side's witnesses have not been cross-
examined does not obligate the court to accept their evidence.

Object of cross-examination: Cross-examination is a vital feature of all

modern systems of evidence and, in the words of Professor Wigmore, "the
greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth." Cross-
examination, if properly conducted, is one of the most useful and efficacious
means of discovering the truth. Where the facts are in dispute, such cases,
generally speaking, are proved by human testimony. And the testimony of
witness should be checked on the touchstone of cross-examination. The
object of cross-examination may described as three-fold:

(i) to elicit from an adverse witness something in your favour i.e. to establish
the party's own case by means of his opponent's witnesses:

(ii) to destroy or weaken the force of what the witness has said against you
ie. to weaken, qualify or destroy the case of the opponent; and

(iii) to show that the witness is unworthy of belief by impeaching the credit
of the said witness.

In Juwar Singh v. State of MP, it was ruled that cross-examination is not the
only method to discredit a witness's testimony. If the witness's testimony
lacks logic, rationality, or contradicts proven facts, it can be discarded.
Courts are not obligated to accept an unacceptable testimony simply
because there was no cross-examination.

Range of cross-examination: The examination-in-chief and cross-

examination must be related to relevant facts, but cross-examination can
extend to the entire range of relevant facts. Section 138 mandates that if
the examination-in-chief doesn't cover all relevant facts, they can be
exposed during cross-examination. Even for formal proof, the slightest
examination-in-chief allows cross-examiners to ask questions about the
whole case. The range of cross-examination is unlimited, with the only limits
being related to'relevant facts'. The scope of cross-examination is enlarged
by the Evidence Act provisions.

(1) No cross-examination can be allowed of a witness who is "summoned to

produce a document" (Section 139), but it is competent of a witness to
character (Section 140).
(2) Cross-examination differs from the examination-in-chief and re-
examination inasmuch as leading questions can be asked (Sections 142-
143).

(3) Similarly, a witness may be cross-examined as to previous statements

made by him in writing or reduced into writing, and relevant to matters in
question without such writing being shown to him or being proved (Section
145). It may be to test his memory, or it may be to contradict him.

(4) By Sections 146-150, the legislature has tried to give very wide powers
to the cross-examiner to help him in finding out the truth in oral depositions
laid out before the Court. But the Legislature protects the witness (1) from
consequences which he might incur from speaking the truth and (ii) from
needless questions, for the cross-examiner has to see that the imputations
he makes against the witness are well-founded.

(5) In the course of cross-examination, a witness may be asked questions: (i)

to tesi his veracity, (ii) to discover who he is and what is his position in life,
or (iii) to shake his credit by injuring his character, although his answer
might criminare him or expose him to penalty or forfeiture (Section 146).

Power of the court to control the cross-examination: The Court can

interfere with counsel's discretion during cross-examination when the
privilege is being abused and the cross-examination is excessive. It has the
power to prevent abuse of the right of cross-examination. Sections 146 to
152 outline rules against aggressive cross-examination, as witness character
can be exposed during cross-examination to determine creditworthiness.
Sections 149 and 150 provide safeguards against assassination of a
witness's character, avoiding questions that are indecent, scandalous, or
offensive. Questions should be avoided unless they relate to the facts in
question and should not insult or annoy the witness. These provisions aim to
prevent the abuse of cross-examination.

What questions can be asked in cross-examination. The following

questions may be put to a witness in cross-examination :-

(i) any relevant question which need not be confined to facts deposed to in
the examination-in-chief (Sec. 138);

(ii) any leading question (Sec. 143);

(iii) any question as to his previous written statements for two purposes, viz.,
it may be to test his memory; and have the very object of his testimony be
defeated if the writing were placed in his hands before the questions were
asked; or it may be to contradict him (Sec. 145); ;

(iv) any question to test his veracity

(v) any question to discover who he is and what is his position in life;(vi) any
question to shake his credit by injuring his character, although the answer to
such questions might tend directly or indirectly, to criminate him, or might
expose or tend, directly or indirectly, to expose him to a penalty for
forfeiture. (Sec. 146).

(3) RE-EXAMINATION. Under section 137, the examination of a witness,

subsequent to the cross-examination by the party who called him, is called
his re-examination.

The right to re-examine of the witness takes place after conclusion of cross-
examination (Section 138). The party who called the witness may, if he likes
and if it be necessary, re-examine him.

Object and Range of Re-examination: Re-examination in court is a

process where a party calls a witness to explain matters arising in cross-
examination. The purpose is to reconcile discrepancies between statements
in examination-in-chief and cross-examination, or to remove ambiguity in
deposition or suspicion cast on evidence by cross-examination. If there is no
ambiguity or no need to explain, re-examination should not be allowed. If
doubts were raised regarding the interpretation of evidence during cross-
examination and the prosecution failed to provide clarification, the benefit of
doubt goes to the defense. Re-examination cannot introduce new facts that
do not concern cross-examination. No new questions or Examination of
Witnesses fact can be asked in re-examination, but new matters may be
introduced by court permission, provided the questioning remains within the
range of facts. If any new matter is introduced in re-examination, the
adverse party must be given the opportunity for cross-examination, which is
generally called re-cross-examination.

Leading question cannot be put in re-examination. (Section 142).

The right to re-examine a witness arises only after the conclusion of cross-
examination and as section 138 says, it shall be directed to the explanation
of matters referred to in cross-examination. The object is to give an
opportunity to reconcile the discrepancies, if any, between the statements in
examination-in-chief and cross-examination or to explain any statement
inadvertently made in cross-examination or to remove any ambiguity in the
deposition or suspicion cast on the evidence by cross-examination.

Where there is no ambiguity or where there is nothing to explain, the

questions put in re-examination with the sole object of giving a chance to
the witness to undo the effect of a previous statement should never be
allowed. If testimony of a witness is unacceptable on its face, the courts are
under no obligation to accept the same. Court can't be compelled to accept
it merely on the ground that the same was not cross-examined.
 Examination-in- Cross-Examination Re-Examination
chief

Examination-in-chief Cross examination is Re-Examination is

is the examination of examination of witness examination of witness to
witness by a person by opposite party. remove inconsistency
calling him. which may have arisen
during examination-in-
chief and examination.
cross-

The order of The cross-examination The order of re-

examination-in-chief is is second in order. examination is last.
first.
The purpose of The purpose of cross- The purpose of re
examination-in-chief is examinations to test examination is to remove
to take such the veracity of witness inconsistency which may
testimony for which by impeaching his have arisen during
he is called by party. credit. examination-in- chief and
cross-examination

No leading question Leading question may Leading question cannot be

may be asked in freely be asked in asked in re- examination
examination-in-chief cross-examination. and no new matter should
without permission of be introduced in re-
court. examination without

Examination-in-chief is Cross-examination is Re-examination is not

part and parcel of a most essential for necessary.It is not essential
judicial proceeding. extracting the truth part of judicial proceeding.
and is essential part of
judicial proceedings.