Court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness compelled to answer
Section 151 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness compelled to answer. If any such question relates to a matter not relevant to the suit or proceeding, except in so far as it affects the credit of the witness by injuring his character, the Court shall decide whether or not the witness shall be compelled to answer it, and may, if it thinks fit, warn the witness that he The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) If any such question relates to a matter not relevant to the suit or proceeding, except in so far as it affects the credit of the witness by injuring his character, the Court shall decide whether or not the witness shall be compelled to answer it, and may, if it thinks fit, warn the witness that he is not obliged to answer it.
(2) In exercising its discretion, the Court shall have regard to the following considerations, namely:--
(a) such questions are proper if they are of such a nature that the truth of the imputation conveyed by them would seriously affect the opinion of the Court as to the credibility of the witness on the matter to which he testifies;
(b) such questions are improper if the imputation which they convey relates to matters so remote in time, or of such a character, that the truth of the imputation would not affect, or would affect in a slight degree, the opinion of the Court as to the credibility of the witness on the matter to which he testifies;
(c) such questions are improper if there is a great disproportion between the importance of the imputation made against the witness's character and the importance of his evidence;
(d) the Court may, if it sees fit, draw, from the witness's refusal to answer, the inference that the answer if given would be unfavourable.
Section 151, The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act 47 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Evidence Act
IEA 148 Court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness compelled to answer 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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
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.
-
Rajinder Singh vs Jaipal Singh Malik
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 148, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An amendment to an ejectment petition to incorporate additional grounds such as change of user of demised premises should be allowed at the initial stage of proceedings when evidence is being led, provided the amendment is timely and relevant. The question of whether the alleged change of user has actually occurred is a matter of evidence to be determined during trial, not a ground for rejecting the amendment application at the pleading stage. The Rent Controller erred in rejecting the amendment application based on the reasoning that mere installation of computers does not constitute change of use, as this is a factual matter requiring evidence.
On this section: The Rent Controller noted that the respondent-tenant could be confronted with his statement regarding commercial use when he steps into the witness box under Section 148 of the Indian Evidence Act, which deals with cross-examination on matters not previously mentioned
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 151
What have the courts held on Section 151 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
Rajinder Singh vs Jaipal Singh Malik (23 Sep 2013) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IEA 148, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: The Rent Controller noted that the respondent-tenant could be confronted with his statement regarding commercial use when he steps into the witness box under Section 148 of the Indian Evidence Act, which deals with cross-examination on matters not previously mentioned.
How do I find court cases under Section 151 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 151, section 151 BSA, section 151 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. People searching for it also type scouts 151. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with Rajinder Singh vs Jaipal Singh Malik (23 Sep 2013).
What should I read with Section 151 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and has it changed?
2 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. It carries forward IEA 148 (Court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness compelled to answer), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 151 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam come into force?
Section 151 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, cited as BSA 151, 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.