by Police - Bureau of Police Research and Development

The Indian Police JournalIn the case of Tahsildar Singh v. State of U.P., the Court illustratedthose situations where omission is considered crucial and omissionmay also be used for contradiction. Criminal Procedure Code permitsduring interrogation for the contradiction of maker of statement when“An omission to state a fact or circumstances in the statementreferred to in sub-section (1) may amount to contradiction if the regard to the context in which such omission occurs and whetherany omission amounts to a contradiction in the particular contextshall be a question of fact.”Use of Statement by Prosecutionhe takes statement by the use of threat and commission of violence. to use the statement for any purpose except few exceptions. Forcorroboration of his witness, statement can never be used. Further,for contradiction of accused and defence witness, it can never be usedin other words, if statement recorded is of the accused or defencewitness, statement u/s 161 cannot be admissible and only admissiblewhen statement recorded is of prosecution witness. In the followingsituations, prosecution may use statement taken u/s 161 Cr.P.C. :(i) Contradiction of its own witness recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. for contradiction of its witness meansprosecution for shaking his credibility and to show the truth beforecourt; with the permission of court, may make cross-examinationof its own witness and at this stage, according to Sec.162 Cr.P.C.,may use his statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. for the purposeof contradiction.(ii) To explain contradiction made by defenceon the basis of statement recorded under Sec. 161 Cr.P.C.,then prosecution is permitted to use any part of statement forJanuary - March, 2013135