Impeaching credit of witness
Section 158 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with impeaching credit of witness. The credit of a witness may be impeached in the following ways by the adverse party, or, with the consent of the Court, by the party who calls him-- (a) by the evidence of persons who testify that they, from their knowledge of the witness, believe him to be unworthy of credit; The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
The credit of a witness may be impeached in the following ways by the adverse party, or, with the consent of the Court, by the party who calls him--
(a) by the evidence of persons who testify that they, from their knowledge of the witness, believe him to be unworthy of credit;
(b) by proof that the witness has been bribed, or has accepted the offer of a bribe, or has received any other corrupt inducement to give his evidence;
(c) by proof of former statements inconsistent with any part of his evidence which is liable to be contradicted.
Explanation.--A witness declaring another witness to be unworthy of credit may not, upon his examination-in-chief, give reasons for his belief, but he may be asked his reasons in cross-examination, and the answers which he gives cannot be contradicted, though, if they are false, he may afterwards be charged with giving false evidence.
Illustrations.
(a) A sues B for the price of goods sold and delivered to B. C says that he delivered the goods to B. Evidence is offered to show that, on a previous occasion, he said that he had not delivered goods to B. The evidence is admissible.
(b) A is accused of the murder of B. C says that B, when dying, declared that A had given B the wound of which he died. Evidence is offered to show that, on a previous occasion, C said that B, when dying, did not declare that A had given B the wound of which he died. The evidence is admissible
Section 158, The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act 47 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Evidence Act
IEA 155 Impeaching credit of witness Text carried over almost unchanged 95%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
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.
-
State of U. P vs Veer Singh
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 155, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a person who makes a statement believed to be a dying declaration subsequently survives, such statement must be treated under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and not as a dying declaration under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Such statements can be used only for corroboration under Section 157 or for contradiction under Section 155 of the Evidence Act, and not as substantive evidence. Therefore, the acquittal of accused persons solely on the ground that they were not named in such a limited statement, when they were named in the FIR and other evidence of their involvement exists, constitutes a manifest error of law and is indefensible. Appellate courts must apply their mind objectively to all evidence on record and not dispose of appeals on erroneous or incomplete analysis of evidence.
On this section: Impeaching credibility; statements under Section 164 CrPC can be used to contradict a witness
-
Ladi vs State of Haryana
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 155, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An accused has an indefeasible right to fair trial and equal opportunity to prove his innocence. Electronically recorded conversations are admissible as documentary evidence under the amended Indian Evidence Act and Information Technology Act 2000 when: (1) the conversation is relevant to matters in issue; (2) the voice is properly identified; and (3) the accuracy of the recorded conversation is proved by eliminating the possibility of tampering, erasure, addition or manipulation. Courts must exercise their powers under Section 311 CrPC and Section 165 Evidence Act to examine witnesses and elicit evidence essential to just decision, taking a participatory role in trials to arrive at truth. When a witness has not been cross-examined on material evidence that subsequently emerges, courts should grant opportunity for re-examination to ensure fair trial.
On this section: Deals with impeaching credit of witness by proof of former statements inconsistent with any part of his evidence which is liable to be contradicted.
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 158
What have the courts held on Section 158 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
State of U. P vs Veer Singh (28 Apr 2004) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IEA 155, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Impeaching credibility; statements under Section 164 CrPC can be used to contradict a witness. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2004 to 2013.
How do I find court cases under Section 158 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 158, section 158 BSA, section 158 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. People searching for it also type bsa troop 158. 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 State of U. P vs Veer Singh (28 Apr 2004).
What should I read with Section 158 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and has it changed?
It carries forward IEA 155 (Impeaching credit of witness), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 158 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam come into force?
Section 158 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, cited as BSA 158, 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.