सं Samvidhan

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Section 146

Leading questions

Why this exists

The rule comes from long-standing evidence law principles (carried over from the Indian Evidence Act, 1872) meant to ensure that a witness's testimony reflects their own memory and knowledge, not words put into their mouth by a friendly lawyer. Restricting leading questions during examination-in-chief protects the reliability of testimony, while allowing them in cross-examination lets the opposing lawyer test and challenge the witness's story effectively.

How courts read it

Indian courts, interpreting the identical provisions earlier found in Sections 141–143 of the Evidence Act, 1872, have consistently held that the bar on leading questions in examination-in-chief is a safeguard against coaching a witness, but is a rule of practice rather than an absolute rule — courts have discretion to permit such questions on formal, undisputed, or already-established facts to save time. Cross-examination has been treated as the arena where leading questions are the norm, since its purpose is to test credibility and expose weaknesses in the witness's account.

Common misconceptions
  • Myth: Leading questions are always banned in court.
    Fact: They are only restricted during examination-in-chief and re-examination when objected to; they are freely allowed during cross-examination.
  • Myth: A judge must always block a leading question if the lawyer asks one.
    Fact: The court has discretion to permit leading questions even in examination-in-chief for introductory, undisputed, or already-proved matters, and can allow them if no objection is raised.