K. P. Tamilmaran vs State 2025 INSC 576 - FIR - Hostile Witness - S. 165 Evidence Act - Honour Killing

Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Section 154 - Even in the absence of a formal informant, the police is duty-bound to register the case whenever they receive any information regarding the commission of a cognizable offence. (Para 69)

Indian Evidence Act 1872 - Section 165 ; Code of Criminal Procedure 1973- Section 161,162- Even though the statements recorded under Section 161 of CrPC cannot be used for any purposes in a trial due to the embargo placed under Section 162 CrPC, however, the power of the Trial Court under Section 165 Evidence Act is wide enough to put questions based on the statement under Section 161 CrPC to any witness or party at any stage to secure the ends of justice. (Para 54)- The Courts are not barred from putting questions which may contradict the witness with the previous statements made before the police. The special powers of the Court under Section 165 of the Evidence Act are not impaired or controlled by the provisions of Section 162 of the CrPC (Para 51)- The importance of Section 165 in the meaningful conduct of a trial discussed - Referred to Ram Chander v. State of Haryana (1981) 3 SCC 191. (Para 52)

Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 - Sections 311, 162,165 - Powers under Section 311 CrPC can either be exercised on an application moved by either side to the case or suo moto by the Court. In case a person is not listed as a witness in the charge-sheet but later, the prosecution desires to bring that person as an additional prosecution witness, then the prosecution can move an application to bring this person as a prosecution witness. It is then for the Court to decide whether such a person is required as a witness or not. If the Court finds that such a person should have been examined as a prosecution witness and he/she was omitted from the list of witnesses due to some oversight, mistake or for any other reason, the Court may allow the application and such a person can be examined as a prosecution witness. Thereafter, the normal course of examination-in-chief, cross- examination, etc. would follow as per the procedure. On the other hand, when the Court calls a person as a Court witness, there are some restrictions regarding the cross-examination of such witness- In a case where neither party is interested in examining a person as a witness yet the Court feels that the evidence of such a person is necessary for a just decision, the Court though cannot compel either the prosecution or the defence to call a witness, but it can invoke its power under Section 311 CrPC, read with Section 165 of the Evidence Act and call such a person as a Court witness. Whether a person is required to be examined as a witness for a just decision is again a question which has to be decided by the Court on the basis of the facts of that particular case. (Para 49) As far as cross-examination of a Court witness is concerned, no party can claim cross-examination of a Court witness as a matter of right. A Court witness can only be examined with the leave of the Court -Where a Court witness says something prejudicial to any party, then such a party must be allowed to cross-examine that witness- Court witnesses can be cross- examined by either side but only with the leave of the Court. Further, the cross-examination is to be restricted only to what was stated by this witness in his/her reply to the questions of the Court, and a Court witness cannot be contradicted to his/her previous statements made before the police i.e. statements under section 161 of CrPC. (Para 48-51)

Criminal Trial - Court cannot ignore the testimonies of witnesses only because they are close relatives of the victim- In cases where the crime is committed at the residence or a place near the residence of the deceased, it is the close relatives who are likely to be a witness to the crime. They are natural witnesses. (Para 39)

Criminal Trial - Hostile Witness - The phrase ‘hostile witness’ has come to be used for a witness who gives a statement contrary to the story of the side for which he/she is a witness. All the same, because a witness has supported some, though not all, aspects of a case, it would not automatically mean that this witness has to be declared ‘hostile’. the maxim “falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus”, is not applicable to our criminal justice system. It is for the Court to distinguish the wheat from the chaff while dealing with the depositions of a hostile witness. Courts can rely upon that part of the deposition of a hostile witness which is corroborated by other evidence on record. If part of the evidence of a hostile witness corroborates with other reliable evidence, then that part of the evidence is admissible. Once a prosecution witness has been declared hostile and then cross-examined by the prosecution, then it is for the Court to evaluate the veracity of the testimony. There can be several reasons for a witness to turn hostile and the court must also look into these factors while evaluating the evidence given by a hostile witness. (Para 36)

Indian Evidence Act - Section 154 - A party can cross-examine its own witness under Section 154 Evidence Act, even without getting a declaration of ‘hostility’. The only restriction to cross- examination under Section 154 Evidence Act is that the party, who seeks to cross-examine its own witness, must obtain the leave of the Court. Whether there is a declaration of ‘hostility’ or not, one thing is clear that evidence of witness, who has been cross-examined under Section 154 Evidence Act by the party who called such witness, cannot be washed off entirely and it is for the Court to see what can be retrieved from such evidence. (Para 31)

Honor Killing - A wicked and odious crime is the ugly reality of our deeply entrenched caste structure. Honour-killing, as these are called, must get a strong measure of punishment. (Para 75)

Criminal Investigation - The purpose of an investigation, like the purpose of a trial, is to reach to the truth. The duty of an Investigating Officer is to lawfully collect evidence. (Para 67)

LawLens - AI-Driven Legal Research for Indian Laws

Discover AI-powered legal research tools for Indian law professionals

AI-Driven Legal Research for Indian Laws