Skip to content


Emperor Vs. Reed - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in69Ind.Cas.630
AppellantEmperor
RespondentReed
Cases ReferredEmpress v. Durga
Excerpt:
witness - public prosecutor, whether bound to call false witness. - .....on behalf of the government and the country to call or put into the witness box for cross-examination a witness whom be believes to be a false or unnecessary witness.' the learned standing counsel has refused to call mr. grant on the ground that he believes him to be a false witness. in the former trial mr, grant was called by the court and cross examined by both sides. he was not examined as a witness for the crown, in which case other considerations would have arisen, and in the circumstances i decline to interfere.
Judgment:

Buckland, J.

1. I know of no authority, nor has any been advanced for the proposition that it is the duty of the Public Prosecutor to call a witness who he has reason to believe would give false evidence. In stating my opinion I cannot do better than adopt the language of a former Chief Justice of the High Court at Allahabad when be said in Queen-Empress v. Durga 16 A. 84 : A.W.N. (1894) 7 : 8 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 55. (F.B.): 'It cannot be the duty of a Public Prosecutor acting on behalf of the Government and the country to call or put into the witness box for cross-examination a witness whom be believes to be a false or unnecessary witness.' The learned Standing Counsel has refused to call Mr. Grant on the ground that he believes him to be a false witness. In the former trial Mr, Grant was called by the Court and cross examined by both sides. He was not examined as a witness for the Crown, in which case other considerations would have arisen, and in the circumstances I decline to interfere.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //