1] AIR 2002 SC 3137 Balu Sonba Shinde Vs. State of Mah. by www.vakilsaheb.org
Section – 154 – Hostile witness, ‘ His evidence need not be rejected ipso facto on that count. Parties can take advantage of the advantaageous portion therein. However, Court has to be extremely cautious and circumspect in such acceptance.”
2] Cril. L. J. (1) 317 Dharyshil Vs. State of Mah.
Hostile Witness : Merely because a witness turns hostile, his entire testimony cannot be thrown out.
3] AIR 2009 (3) SC 2959 Mallapa Siddappa Alakanaur Vs. State of Karnataka.,
Hostile witness : ‘ in FIR witness stated that when he went near land in question, accused persons attacked boy and committed his murder. During his evidence, however, he stated that accused persons had already assaulted and murdered deceased before he and his son reached spot. He had also very specifically stated that he had not seen accused persons cutting neck of deceased. There was no reason to declare him hostile. Fact that during his narration person taking down report may have committed this mistake. It would not fatal to his evidence.
4] AIR 2010 SC 2914 G. Parshwnath Vs. State of Karnataka.
Hostile Witness : His testimony need not be rejected in entirety. It is settled law that just because a witness turns hostile his entire evidence need not be rejected by court. His evidence can be relied upon to the extent to which it supports the prosecution version.
5] (Meena Gopalkrishna Mudiliar Vs. State of Mah. 1993 Cr. L. J. 3624) by www.vakilsaheb.org
Where the party calling a witness declared him hostile and allowed to be cross-examined, it was held that he was not necessarily an unreliable witness and his evidence, if corroborated by other reliable evidence, can sustain conviction.
6] (State of U. P. Vs. Ramesh Mishra AIR 1996 SC 2766 )
It is equally settled law that the evidence of a hostile witness would not be totally rejected if spoken in favour of the prosecution or the accused, but it can be subjected to close scrutiny and that portion of the evidence which is consistent with the case of the prosecution or defence may be accepted.
7] (Gurasingh vs. State of Rajasthan 2001 Cr. L. J . 487 (SC) ( Anil Rai Vs. State of Bihar 2001 Cr. L.J.3969 (SC)
The testimony of witness who has turned hostile is not to be excluded entirely or rendered unworthy of consideration. His testimony remains admissible. A conviction can be based on it if it finds some corroboration.
8) State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Karuppusamy And Others, reported in 1993 SCR (2) 415 – 1993 SCC Supl. (1) 78
Only a tutored witness can depose in a parrot-like fashion. On the contrary, a natural witness is bound to commit mistakes.
9) In State of U.P. -vrs- Ramesh Prasad Misra and another (1996) 10 SCC 360, the Hon’ble Apex Court opined that the evidence of a hostile witness would not be totally rejected if spoken in favour of the prosecution or the accused, but it can be subjected to close scrutiny and that portion of the evidence which is consistent with the case of the prosecution or defence may be accepted …..”AIR 2002 SC 3137 Balu Sonba Shinde -Vrs- State of Maharashtra, ‘While it is true declaration of a witness to be hostile does not ipso facto amount to rejection of his evidence – and it is now well settled that the portion of evidence being advantageous to the parties may be taken advantage of – but the court before whom such a reliance is placed shall have to be extremely cautious and circumspect in such reliance.’
A witness is considered to be hostile witness when in the opinion of the Court the witness is saying against the party which has invited him and the witness adopts an adverse attitude to the party that has invited him. A hostile witness is that who gives evidence in his own way but he shows that he does not intend to speak truth. The hostility of the witness and his adverse attitude can only be inferred from his statement and his conduct. The Court should exercise its discretion very judiciously because the witness wants to conceal the truth or who has been won over by the adverse party. Therefore it is necessary that if witness did not disclose the fact even though he knows the fact the court should declare the witness hostile and permit to cross-examination to the party who has called such witness to adduce evidence.
AIR 1983 SUPREME COURT 911 = 1983 Cri LJ 1285
Sheikh Zakir, Appellant v. State of Bihar, Respondent.
Para 5 It is not quite strange that some witnesses do turn hostile but that by itself would not prevent a Court from finding an accused guilty if there is otherwise acceptable evidence in support of the prosecution.
Evidence of Hostile Witness
1) Bhagwan Dass Vs. State ( NCT) of Delhi AIR 2011 SC 1863 – 2011 (6) JT 345 – 2011 (5) Scale 498\
2) Himanshu @ Chintu V. State ( NCT of Delhi) (2011) 2 SCC 36
3). Govindappa/State of Karnataka (2010) 6 SCC – 533
4) Govindaraju @ Govinda Vs. State (2012) 4 SCC – 722
5) Muniappan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, (2010) 9 SCC – 567.
