§ SECTION 156 · BSA 2023 · CHAPTER X — OF EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES

Exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing veracity

The answer is final. When a question is relevant only because it shakes a witness’s credit, his answer cannot be contradicted by other evidence — to avoid side-trials. Two exceptions let contradiction in: a previous conviction, and a matter impeaching his impartiality.

How to read Section 156

If a question only attacks a witness’s character, his answer is final — you cannot call evidence to contradict it — except on a previous conviction or on his bias.

The rule

A question relevant only as it injures the witness’s character/credit — once answered, no evidence may contradict him (though a false answer risks a false-evidence charge).

Exception 1

A denied previous conviction may be proved.

Exception 2

A denial of facts impeaching his impartiality (bias) may be contradicted.

The bare Act

The section in its own words — the rule, two exceptions, and four illustrations.

Section 156 · verbatim

Exception 1.—If a witness is asked whether he has been previously convicted of any crime and denies it, evidence may be given of his previous conviction.

Exception 2.—If a witness is asked any question tending to impeach his impartiality, and answers it by denying the facts suggested, he may be contradicted.

Illustrations

(a) A claim against an underwriter is resisted on the ground of fraud. The claimant is asked whether, in a former transaction, he had not made a fraudulent claim. He denies it. Evidence is offered to show that he did make such a claim. The evidence is inadmissible.

(b) A witness is asked whether he was not dismissed from a situation for dishonesty. He denies it. Evidence is offered to show that he was dismissed for dishonesty. The evidence is not admissible.

(c) A affirms that on a certain day he saw B at Goa. A is asked whether he himself was not on that day at Varanasi. He denies it. Evidence is offered to show that A was on that day at Varanasi. The evidence is admissible, not as contradicting A on a fact which affects his credit, but as contradicting the alleged fact that B was seen on the day in question in Goa. In each of these cases, the witness might, if his denial was false, be charged with giving false evidence.

(d) A is asked whether his family has not had a blood feud with the family of B against whom he gives evidence. He denies it. He may be contradicted on the ground that the question tends to impeach his impartiality.

In short: this is the collateral-facts rule — the principle that answers on credit alone are final. Where a question is relevant to the case only in so far as it shakes the witness’s credit by injuring his character, and the witness answers it, the cross-examiner is stuck with that answer: no evidence may be called to contradict it. The reason is practical — to stop trials being side-tracked into endless mini-disputes about a witness’s character. (The witness is not free to lie, though: a false answer can be met with a charge of giving false evidence.) Two exceptions let contradiction back in, because these matters are too important to leave to the witness’s bare denial: a previous conviction (Exception 1), and anything impeaching his impartiality — bias, interest, hostility (Exception 2). The illustrations map it: a denied past fraud (a) or a dishonest dismissal (b) cannot be contradicted — pure credit; but where the ‘credit’ fact also disproves a fact in issue — A being at Varanasi shows he could not have seen B at Goa (c) — the evidence comes in, because it is no longer only about credit; and a denied blood feud (d) may be contradicted, going to impartiality.

→ This carries forward IEA 1872 § 153 — answers on collateral credit are final, save on conviction or bias.

Glossary

relevant only in so far as it shakes his credit

A collateral question — going only to credibility, not to a fact in issue.

no evidence shall be given to contradict him

His answer is final on that collateral matter.

charged with giving false evidence

A false denial can still be prosecuted.

previous conviction (Exception 1)

A denied prior conviction may be proved.

impeach his impartiality (Exception 2)

Show bias, interest or hostility — contradiction allowed.

collateral vs substantive

If the fact also proves a matter in issue (illustration c), it is admissible.

The picture

Pure-credit answers are final; convictions, bias, and facts that also prove the issue are not caught.

The section, part by part

Tap a part — the picture-story tells it first; the word-by-word text and example follow.

The finality ruleThe two exceptions

finalityA pure-credit answer is the end of the matter

In one lineWhen a question is relevant only because it injures the witness’s character, his answer cannot be contradicted by evidence — unless the fact also proves a matter in issue.

When a witness has been asked and has answered any question which is relevant to the inquiry only in so far as it tends to shake his credit by injuring his character, no evidence shall be given to contradict him; but, if he answers falsely, he may afterwards be charged with giving false evidence.only-credit answers are final…you are stuck with his answer on a pure-credit matter — but he may be charged if he lied.

(c) A affirms that on a certain day he saw B at Goa. A is asked whether he himself was not on that day at Varanasi. He denies it. Evidence is offered to show that A was on that day at Varanasi. The evidence is admissible, not as contradicting A on a fact which affects his credit, but as contradicting the alleged fact that B was seen on the day in question in Goa. In each of these cases, the witness might, if his denial was false, be charged with giving false evidence.(c) the boundary — it also disproves the issuebecause A being at Varanasi disproves that he saw B at Goa, the evidence is not only about credit — so it comes in.

ExampleIllustrations (a) and (b): a denied past fraud or a denied dismissal for dishonesty cannot be contradicted — pure credit. But (c): evidence that the witness was elsewhere comes in, because it disproves the fact in issue he spoke to.

✗ Not thisThe bar is only for matters relevant solely to credit. It does not shut out evidence that also bears on a fact in issue — and it never licenses a witness to lie.

exceptionsConvictions and bias can always be proved

In one lineTwo matters escape the finality rule: a denied previous conviction (Exception 1), and a denial impeaching the witness’s impartiality (Exception 2).

Exception 1.—If a witness is asked whether he has been previously convicted of any crime and denies it, evidence may be given of his previous conviction.Exc 1: a denied prior conviction is provablea witness cannot bury a previous conviction behind a denial — it may be proved.

Exception 2.—If a witness is asked any question tending to impeach his impartiality, and answers it by denying the facts suggested, he may be contradicted.Exc 2: bias may be exposed by contradictiona denial of facts showing partiality may be contradicted — bias goes to the worth of the whole evidence.

(d) A is asked whether his family has not had a blood feud with the family of B against whom he gives evidence. He denies it. He may be contradicted on the ground that the question tends to impeach his impartiality.(d) a denied blood feud — impartialitythe feud between the families shows a motive to lie, so his denial may be contradicted.

ExampleIllustration (d): a witness denies a blood feud with the party he testifies against. Because it goes to his impartiality, evidence of the feud may be led to contradict him — unlike the pure-credit denials in (a) and (b).

✗ Not thisThe exceptions are only two — a previous conviction and impartiality. Other pure-credit denials remain final; they are not opened up just because the cross-examiner would like to disprove them.

Connected provisions

§ 155 · back

IEA 1872, § 153

Carried forward — answers on collateral credit are final, save on conviction or bias.

BSA 2023 § 156 — Exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing veracity