Section 132 of IEA : Section 132: Witness Not Excused From Answering On Ground That Answer Will Criminate

Explanation using Example

Imagine a scenario where an individual, Mr. Sharma, is on trial for alleged embezzlement of funds from his company. During the trial, a witness, Ms. Gupta, is called to testify. Ms. Gupta is also an employee at the company and has knowledge of certain transactions that could implicate her in the embezzlement scheme.

When asked about her involvement in the transactions, Ms. Gupta is hesitant to answer because she believes her testimony might incriminate her. However, under Section 132 of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, she cannot refuse to answer the question on these grounds. She is compelled to provide a truthful response, even if it involves admitting her own illegal activities.

Despite her fears, the proviso in Section 132 ensures that her compelled testimony cannot be used against her in any subsequent criminal proceedings, except if she is being prosecuted for lying under oath during the current trial. Therefore, Ms. Gupta can speak freely without the risk of her words leading to her arrest or prosecution for the embezzlement, though she must be truthful to avoid charges of perjury.