Questions lawful in cross examination
Section 149 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with questions lawful in cross examination. When a witness is cross-examined, he may, in addition to the questions hereinbefore referred to, be asked any questions which tend-- (a) to test his veracity; The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
When a witness is cross-examined, he may, in addition to the questions hereinbefore referred to, be asked any questions which tend--
(a) to test his veracity; or
(b) to discover who he is and what is his position in life; or
(c) to shake his credit, by injuring his character, although the answer to such questions might tend directly or indirectly to criminate him, or might expose or tend directly or indirectly to expose him to a penalty or forfeiture:
Provided that in a prosecution for an offence under section 64, section 65, section 66, section 67, section 68, section 69, section 70 or section 71 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or for attempt to commit any such offence, where the question of consent is an issue, it shall not be permissible to adduce evidence or to put questions in the cross-examination of the victim as to the general immoral character, or previous sexual experience, of such victim with any person for proving such consent or the quality of consent.
Section 149, The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act 47 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Evidence Act
IEA 146 Questions lawful in cross-examination Text carried over almost unchanged 100%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita s. 71 Punishment for repeat offenders
- s. 64 Rules as to notice to produce
- s. 65 Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document produced
- s. 66 Proof as to electronic signature
- s. 67 Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested
- s. 68 Proof where no attesting witness found
- s. 69 Admission of execution by party to attested document
- s. 70 Proof when attesting witness denies execution
Referred to by 1
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Gian Chand vs State of Haryana
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 146, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Once possession of contraband articles is established in a drug trafficking case, the statutory presumptions under Sections 35 and 54 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 operate against the accused, presuming conscious possession and knowledge of the contraband. The burden thereupon shifts to the accused to prove that he had no knowledge or conscious possession of the contraband. The absence of independent witnesses does not render police testimony unreliable if such testimony is found to be cogent, convincing, credible and reliable upon scrutiny. The failure to examine incriminating circumstances under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not vitiate the trial unless material prejudice to the accused is demonstrated. In cases of narcotics possession, the facts regarding how the contraband came to be in the vehicle fall within the special knowledge of the accused under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
On this section: Permits questioning of witness to test veracity and consistency of evidence
-
Ganga Singh vs State of M. P
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 146, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The testimony of a rape victim (prosecutrix) is a competent and reliable form of evidence under Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act requiring no mandatory corroboration in material particulars as the prosecutrix is a victim, not an accomplice. Her evidence carries the same evidentiary weight as that of an injured witness in cases of physical violence. When the prosecutrix provides a clear, categorical account of rape that is corroborated by evidence of prior consistent statements (under Section 157 IEA), forensic evidence confirming intercourse, and absence of motive for false implication, a conviction for rape under Section 376 IPC can be sustained beyond reasonable doubt notwithstanding absence of physical injuries or gaps in peripheral details not subject to cross-examination. The legal definition of 'consent' under Section 375 IPC requires voluntary participation involving full exercise of intelligence based on knowledge of the significance and moral quality of the act with complete freedom of choice between resistance and assent; inability to physically resist forced intercourse negates any claim of consent. Defects in police investigation do not warrant acquittal if the prosecution has established guilt through reliable evidence beyond reasonable doubt; defects only merit acquittal if they create reasonable doubt regarding the core charge.
On this section: Cross-examination of witness; used to test veracity of witness; failure to put contradictory facts prevents later impeachment based on omissions
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 149
What have the courts held on Section 149 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
Gian Chand vs State of Haryana (23 Jul 2013) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IEA 146, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Permits questioning of witness to test veracity and consistency of evidence. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court.
How do I find court cases under Section 149 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BSA 149, section 149 BSA, section 149 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. People searching for it also type bsa troop 149. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Gian Chand vs State of Haryana (23 Jul 2013).
What should I read with Section 149 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 71 (Punishment for repeat offenders), section 64 (Rules as to notice to produce), section 65 (Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document produced), section 66 (Proof as to electronic signature), and on 4 further provisions, so none of them can safely be read on its own. 1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. It carries forward IEA 146 (Questions lawful in cross-examination), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 149 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam come into force?
Section 149 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, cited as BSA 149, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 26. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant1128 words
- 12. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body or bodily feeling1076 words
- 95. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement815 words
- 2. Definitions794 words
- 6. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct773 words
- 63. Admissibility of electronic records764 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.