LAW OF EVIDENCE 653
§ Contradiction on relevant facts
The next question is; Is such contradiction permitted to the party who called the witness or Is it permitted to the adverse party only ?
That, a party may contradict the answers given by the witness called on behalf of the adverse party, is beyond question and is always permissible. The defence witnesses are thereto contradict. But it does not seem to be quite so obvious in the other case. A witness is called on behalf of a party. In answer to a question on a relevant fact, he gives a particular answer which the party who called him feels is untrue. Can the party, who called him, call another witness to contradict him ?
The answer is that he can. The law seems to make difference between discrediting his own witness by attacking his general character and showing that in a particular respect his testimony is incorrrect.
§ Manner of Examination of a Witness
Manner of Examination means the manner of interrogating the witness, i.e. the manner of putting questions.
This matter is left not to the discretion of the party interrogating the witness, but is regulated by law.
From the standpoint of the manner of putting questions, questions are either leading questions or not leading questions.
A leading question is generally said to be a question which can be answered by a mere yes or no. Although, all such questions undoubtedly come within the rule, the character of leading question is not limited to them.
The Evidence Act defines a leading question as one, which suggests a particular answer, which the questioner expects to have from the witness. ?
Illus.
On a charge for murder by stabbing, to ask a witness ‘Did you see the accused covered with blood and with a knife in coming away from the corpse ?’ is a leading question.