​Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023Cross-Examination of Person Called to Produce a Document (Section 144)

​Introduction
Courts often summon individuals only to produce documents, not to give testimony on facts. A common misunderstanding is that such a person automatically becomes a witness and can be cross-examined. Section 144 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 clarifies this position and draws a clear distinction between a person summoned to produce a document and a witness who gives oral evidence.

Section 144 – Statutory Rule
Section 144 provides that:

• A person summoned merely to produce a document does not become a witness simply because he produces that document.
• Such a person cannot be cross-examined unless and until he is formally called as a witness.

In short:
Production of a document ≠ giving evidence as a witness.

Obligation to Produce the Document

• A person summoned to produce a document:
  • Must bring the document to court, or
  • Cause it to be brought,

👉 Irrespective of any objection regarding:

• Its production, or
• Its admissibility.

The validity of objections is decided by the Court, not by the person producing the document.

Compliance with Summons
A person is deemed to have complied with the court’s summons if:

• He personally brings the document, or
• He ensures that the document is produced before the court.

He is not required to explain the contents or circumstances of the document unless called as a witness.

Why Such a Person Is Not a WitnessA witness is one who:

• Gives oral testimony on facts relevant to the case, and
• Is subject to examination, cross-examination, and re-examination.

A person summoned under Section 144:

• Performs a ministerial duty of producing a document
• Does not depose to facts
• Does not give evidence on oath

Hence, he cannot be cross-examined as a witness.

When Can Such a Person Be Cross-Examined?

• Only when:
  • The court or a party formally calls him as a witness, and
  • He is examined on oath regarding facts relevant to the case.

Once called as a witness:

• He becomes subject to:
  • Examination-in-chief
  • Cross-examination
  • Re-examination

Judicial Illustration
In Parmeshwari Devi v. State, a woman was summoned only to produce a deed of dissolution of a firm. The court held that:

• Since she was not called as a witness,
• She could not be examined or cross-examined merely because she produced the document.

This case clearly affirms the principle laid down in Section 144.

Object and Rationale of Section 144The object of this section is to:

• Prevent harassment of individuals summoned only for document production
• Avoid unnecessary cross-examination
• Maintain procedural fairness

Without this safeguard:

• Any person producing a document could be subjected to hostile questioning, even without giving evidence.

Practical Importance
Section 144 ensures:

• Clear separation between document production and oral testimony
• Protection of third parties and custodians of records
• Efficient conduct of trials without procedural abuse

Critical AnalysisStrengths

1. Protects non-witnesses from unnecessary cross-examination
2. Ensures procedural clarity
3. Prevents misuse of summons
4. Encourages cooperation in document production
5. Preserves fairness in judicial proceedings

Limitations

1. If facts surrounding the document are crucial, the person must be separately summoned as a witness
2. Requires courts to be careful in distinguishing roles

Conclusion
Section 144 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 establishes an important procedural safeguard by clarifying that a person summoned only to produce a document does not automatically become a witness. Such a person cannot be cross-examined unless formally called to give evidence.

By drawing this distinction, the section prevents procedural abuse, protects individuals from unnecessary examination, and ensures that cross-examination is reserved only for those who actually testify to facts.