Section 165 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, recognizes the inherent powers of the Court to find out and reach to the truth of the matter.
Section 165 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, empowers every Judge, so as to discover or to obtain proper proof of relevant facts, to ask any question he pleases, in any form, at any time, of any witness, or of the parties, about any fact relevant or irrelevant; and may order the production of any document or thing; and neither the parties nor their agents shall be entitled to make any objection to any such question or order, however, subject to mandate of Sections 121 to 131 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Act, and of course subject to protection afforded to Accused persons from Self-Incrimination and other protection afforded under Article 20 of the Constitution of India.
Another fascinating aspect of Section 165 is that, this Section can be applied at any stage of the legal proceedings, be it Original, Appellate, Revisional or Review; and can be applied across jurisdictions, whether Civil, Criminal, or Revenue or any jurisdiction having attributes of judicial proceeding.
In a Case before it, the Hon’ble Apex Court observed to say that: …if the lapse or omission is committed by the investigative agency or because of negligence the prosecution evidence is required to be examined de hors such omissions to find out whether the said evidence is reliable or not. The contaminated conduct of officials should not stand on the way of the Courts getting at the truth by having recourse to Secs. 311 and 391 of the Code and Sec. 165 of the Evidence Act at the appropriate and relevant stages and evaluating the entire evidence; otherwise the designed mischief would be perpetuated with a premium to the offenders and justice would not only denied to the complainant party but also made an ultimate casuality. [AIR 2004 SC 3114]
In a very recent ruling, the Hon’ble Apex Court had the opportunity to lay emphasis upon the mandate of Section 165 of the Evidence Act. The Hon’ble Court said: We say this for the reasons that under Section 165 of the Act, a trial judge has tremendous powers to “ask any question he pleases, in any form, at any time, of any witness, or of the parties about any fact relevant or irrelevant”. It is in fact the duty of the Trial Judge to do so if it is felt that some important and crucial question was left from being asked from a witness. The purpose of the trial is after all to reach to the truth of the matter. [Criminal Appeal No: 530 of 2022; May 04, 2023]
Therefore, the Courts and Tribunals may be persuaded to exercise their powers. It is said that when a power is conferred, and whence it is shown that the circumstances exist for the due exercise of those powers, then such powers must be exercised, failing which it may be argued that the Courts / Authority have failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it. Therefore, Application may be taken out under the provisions of Discovery or u/s 165 of Evidence Act, requesting the Court / Tribunal to exercise their powers / jurisdiction, thereby compelling the adversary to answer such questions, or to produce such things or documents, that are extremely relevant for the truthful decision of the Case.
|
