Section 142

Trials rely on oral testimony, and fairness requires a structured process for testing that testimony. English common law developed this three-stage sequence to let each side present its witness's account, let the opponent challenge it, and let the original side clarify any points raised in cross-examination. India's Evidence Act, 1872 codified this structure in section 137, and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 carries it forward in section 142 with modernized language, without changing its substance.

Under the predecessor provision (section 137 of the Evidence Act, 1872), courts consistently held that examination-in-chief must be confined to relevant facts the witness can speak to, cross-examination can extend to any relevant matter including credibility, and re-examination is limited to explaining matters raised in cross-examination unless the court permits new matter (subject to further cross-examination on that new matter). These interpretive principles are expected to continue applying to section 142 since the text is substantively unchanged.

• Myth: Re-examination lets a party ask the witness anything they forgot to ask earlier.
  Fact: Courts have generally held that re-examination is limited to explaining matters that came up during cross-examination, not introducing entirely new topics, unless the court specifically allows it.
• Myth: Cross-examination can only be done by the opposing lawyer about facts stated in examination-in-chief.
  Fact: Courts have read cross-examination broadly to include questions on the witness's credibility and other relevant matters, not just what was said in the chief examination.