Indian evidence law | Updated 20 October 2026

Questions Intended to Insult or Annoy: Section 155 BSA and Section 152 Evidence Act

Courts must prevent questions that are intended to insult or annoy a witness, including questions that are otherwise proper but needlessly offensive in the way they are framed. The present provision is Section 155 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), corresponding to former Section 152 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Current law: The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 came into force on 1 July 2024. Section 155 addresses insulting, annoying and needlessly offensive questions. Section 170 preserves the former Evidence Act for specified proceedings already pending immediately before commencement.

Section 155 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Heading: Questions intended to insult or annoy.

The Court shall forbid any question which appears to it to be intended to insult or annoy, or which, though proper in itself, appears to the Court needlessly offensive in form.

The word shall makes the prohibition mandatory when the Court forms the opinion described in the section. The rule addresses both the purpose of a question and the manner in which it is expressed. It does not prohibit legitimate, relevant and properly framed cross-examination merely because the answer may be uncomfortable.

Former Section 152 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 152 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 carried the heading Questions intended to insult or annoy and contained the same operative prohibition. It required the Court to forbid a question apparently intended to insult or annoy, or one that, although proper in substance, was needlessly offensive in form.

The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 has been repealed by Section 170(1) of the BSA. Under Section 170(2), applications, trials, inquiries, investigations, proceedings or appeals pending immediately before commencement continue to be dealt with under the former Act as specified in that savings provision. Accordingly, Section 152 remains relevant in the saved matters.

Meaning and scope of the provision

Questions intended to insult

A question framed primarily to humiliate, disparage or personally attack a witness may be forbidden. An advocate cannot justify an unnecessary personal insult simply by placing it in the form of a question.

Questions intended to annoy

Questions that appear designed to harass or provoke a witness rather than elicit useful testimony fall within the statutory restriction. The Court assesses the question in its context.

Needlessly offensive wording

Even a question addressing a legitimate issue may be barred when it is expressed in an unnecessarily offensive way. The relevant inquiry can instead be pursued using neutral, precise language.

Duty of the Court and cross-examination

Section 155 protects the fairness and dignity of witness examination without removing the right to test evidence through lawful questions. The Court decides whether a question appears insulting, annoying or needlessly offensive, taking account of its wording, purpose and relevance.

Mandatory intervention: the Court shall forbid a question meeting the statutory test.
Substance and form: a legitimate subject does not excuse unnecessarily offensive phrasing.
Relevant questioning: the provision does not create a blanket exemption from difficult but lawful questions.
Proper reformulation: counsel may put a relevant question in respectful and non-abusive terms, subject to the Court's control.

Practical illustrations

Example 1: During cross-examination, counsel uses a derogatory personal description instead of asking a factual question about the witness's observations. The Court may prohibit the insulting question.

Example 2: A witness's financial dealings are genuinely relevant, but counsel asks about them using gratuitously abusive language. The Court must forbid the needlessly offensive formulation when the statutory test is met; the relevant facts can be asked about appropriately.

Example 3: Counsel asks a direct and relevant question about a contradiction in the witness's earlier statement. The question does not become impermissible solely because answering it may be embarrassing.

These examples are explanatory illustrations, not reported judicial decisions.

Section 154 BSA (former Section 151 Evidence Act) concerns indecent and scandalous questions. Unlike Section 155, it expressly addresses circumstances in which such questions may concern facts in issue or matters necessary to decide them.

Section 152 BSA addresses questions asked without reasonable grounds, while Section 153 BSA addresses the Court's procedure where such questions are asked. Section 156 BSA concerns exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing veracity.

Official legal sources

Read the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (official India Code PDF), including Sections 152 to 156 and 170. The Ministry of Home Affairs new criminal laws portal also provides the official legislation. Readers should check current notifications and judicial interpretations when applying these provisions to a particular case.

Conclusion

Section 155 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 continues the protection formerly provided by Section 152 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Courts must stop questions that appear intended to insult or annoy, or that are needlessly offensive in form, while allowing lawful and appropriately worded examination of witnesses.