KARAJ SINGH Vs. AMARJIT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The precise question in this petition against the order dated 31.7.2012, passed by the trial court is, "whether the witness, summoned by the petitioner himself, who had refused to accept his signatures on the registered gift deed and the sale deed dated 22.5.2003, could be treated as hostile and suppressing the truth and whether such witness could be declared hostile enabling the petitioner to cross-examine him?" Sense and reasons to contend that the witness was hostile, is the right of the party and to declare the witness as hostile is the satisfaction as well as discretion of the court. A witness is not necessarily hostile because in the process of unfolding the truth he happens to depose something against the party calling him as a witness. It is also a cardinal principle of law that the witness's primary allegiance is to the truth and not the party calling him. The courts should not casually brand a witness "hostile" or "unfavourable" and should act in their judgment to see whether there is any truth. It is also settled that a witness who, to the satisfaction of the court, is suppressing the truth, could be permitted to be cross examined even during the stage of cross examination. However, the proper stage for dealing with the witness under Section 144 of Evidence Act, for putting any question to him, which might be otherwise in cross examination of the adverse party, is either by that witness while examined-in-chief or re-examined.

(2.) Before proceeding further, it would be essential to reproduce certain facts of the present case.

(3.) Now the interesting question to be determined in this case is, "whether the court could exercise its discretion to declare him hostile and permit the petitioner for cross examination?"