Section – 154. Question by party to his own witness

The Court may, in its discretion, permit the person who calls a witness to put any questions to him which might be put in cross examination by the adverse party.

(1) The Court may, in its discretion, permit the person who calls a witness to put any question to him which might be put in cross-examination by the adverse party.

(2) Nothing in this section shall disentitle the person so permitted under sub-section (1), to rely on any part of the evidence of such witness

Hostile witness

Hostile witness is said to be when a party calls in a witness to depose in its own favor, instead the witness goes against the party calling him. This situation arises in many of the cases where witnesses do not give answers in favor of the party calling the person as a witness. The court has to declare the witness as a hostile one. It is not the option of the party calling the witness to do so. The adverse reference by the witness towards the person who calls him is a manner which helps the court to uphold or reject the statement of witness if crucial to a case and the trial.

“A hostile witness is one who from the manner in which he gives evidence shows that he is not desirous of telling the truth to the court.” He is a person who is interested to give evidence for the party who wanted him to give in its favour. But the expression hostile witness does not been used in the Evidence Act.”

Section 154 allows a party calling a witness may, with the permission of the court, put leading questions and cross-examine him when it is found that he is a hostile or unwilling to answer questions put to him. It is discretion of the court to allow party to cross-examine his own witness. .

In trial of an election petition under R.P. Act the provisions of Section 154 can be applied.

Nature of questions

When the permission is granted to the party, although it is absolute discretion of the court to give it or not to cross-examination its own witness alike the adverse party the witness may be asked

(a) leading questions (Section 143) or
(b) question as to his previous statements in writing (Section 145) or
(c) question under section 146 in order to injure his character or
(c) question impeaching his credit (Section 155).

It is absolute discretion of the court. It is legal obligation to exercise discretion invested in the court. When the prosecution witness was not concurring on a point of a post-event detail, the court observed that it was not sufficient for the public prosecutor to proclaim that the witness had adopted a hostile posture.

The testimony of the hostile witness must be closely scrutinized before he is allowed to be cross-examined. The evidence of such witness is not to be rejected ipso facto. The parties can take advantage of believable portion, but the court must be extremely cautious and circumspect in accepting such evidence.

In the case of Sat Paul v. Delhi Administration, the Supreme Court has interpreted this section and defined a hostile witness as one who is not willing, to tell the truth when a party calls him.

In the State of Rajasthan v. Bhera, the Court observed that a previous testimony of a hostile witness can be used as evidence as they are still on record. If the party does not resist the hostility of the witness, then it is upon the Court to find out the truth.