I understand how unsettling this moment is. You may be facing pressure from the accused, a compromise between families, fear for your safety, or a sense that what police wrote down is not what you actually saw. Before you take any step, you need to know what really happens when someone becomes a hostile witness in an attempt to murder case. Turning hostile does not end a criminal case on its own, and it can create serious legal risk for you. The good news is that the law gives you clear protections and remedies if you act carefully and on proper legal advice.

Start with the offence itself. Attempt to murder was punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. For offences committed on or after 1 July 2024, the equivalent provision is Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). The punishment can extend to ten years' imprisonment with fine, and to imprisonment for life if hurt is caused. Because it is so serious, attempt to murder is a cognizable, non-bailable offence triable by a Court of Session. This matters because the State, not the injured person or the witness, is the real prosecutor.

That is the first thing many clients misunderstand. Once an FIR is registered for attempt to murder, the case belongs to the State. The complainant cannot withdraw it simply by changing their mind. Attempt to murder is also a non-compoundable offence. It does not appear in the compoundable list under Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), now Section 359 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). So a private settlement, however sincere, cannot legally close the case in the trial court.

Now consider what "hostile witness" actually means in law. The term does not appear in the statute. It describes a witness who gives testimony in court that departs from, or contradicts, what they earlier told the police or the magistrate. When this happens, the Public Prosecutor can ask the court for permission to cross-examine their own witness. This was Section 154 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and is now Section 157 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA). The court grants this permission at its discretion, and it is routinely granted when a witness resiles from the prosecution story.

Once you are declared hostile, the prosecutor will confront you with your earlier statements. Your police statement under Section 161 CrPC (now Section 180 BNSS) is not signed by you and is not substantive evidence. It can, however, be used to contradict you under Section 162 CrPC (now Section 181 BNSS) read with Section 145 of the Evidence Act (now Section 148 BSA). If you had given a statement before a magistrate under Section 164 CrPC (now Section 183 BNSS), the position is far more serious. That statement is recorded by a judicial officer after warning you, and a sharp departure from it invites scrutiny.

Many people assume that if the key witness turns hostile, the accused is automatically acquitted. That is not correct. The Supreme Court has consistently held that the evidence of a hostile witness is not wiped out entirely. In Bhagwan Singh v. State of Haryana (1976), Sat Paul v. State (Delhi Administration) (1976) and Khujji v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1991), the Court held that the portion of a hostile witness's testimony that is reliable and corroborated can still be accepted. The court separates the grain from the chaff. So parts of what you say, even while hostile, may still be used against the accused.

Courts also do not rely only on oral testimony in an attempt to murder trial. Medical evidence, the injury report, the doctor's testimony, forensic reports, the recovered weapon, CCTV footage, call records and the evidence of other witnesses all matter. If you are the injured person yourself, understand that courts treat an injured witness's evidence with special weight. The injury itself proves presence at the scene. If you deny the attack while medical records show grievous injury, the court may simply disbelieve your new version and convict on the other evidence.

Here is the part you must weigh most carefully. Turning hostile can expose you personally to prosecution for giving false evidence. Giving false evidence was defined under Section 191 IPC and punished under Section 193 IPC. Under the new law, these are Sections 227 and 229 of the BNS. Intentionally giving false evidence in a judicial proceeding can be punished with imprisonment up to seven years and fine. If the false evidence is intended to procure an acquittal in a serious case, the court views it gravely.

The process for this is specific. The trial court can, if it finds it expedient in the interests of justice, hold a preliminary inquiry and file a complaint before a magistrate. This was Section 340 CrPC and is now Section 379 BNSS. At the time of judgment, the court can also take summary action against a witness who has knowingly given false evidence under Section 344 CrPC (now Section 383 BNSS). Courts have increasingly used these powers where witnesses turn hostile after clear statements before a magistrate. The Supreme Court has repeatedly expressed concern about witnesses turning hostile due to money, pressure or compromise, including in State v. Sanjeev Nanda (2012).

There is, however, an important safeguard in your favour. Under Section 195 CrPC (now Section 215 BNSS), no court can take cognizance of false evidence given in court except on a written complaint by that court itself. This means the accused, the police or the other side cannot directly register a perjury FIR against you for your testimony. Only the court can initiate it, and usually only after concluding that the false statement was deliberate. Perjury is also generally treated as a bailable offence, which reduces the risk of immediate custody.

You should also know about Section 132 of the Evidence Act, now Section 137 of the BSA. A witness cannot refuse to answer a relevant question merely because the answer may incriminate them. But an answer they are compelled to give cannot be used to prosecute them, except for giving false evidence. Read with Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which protects against self-incrimination, this means you are protected for compelled answers, but not for lies told on oath. The protection is for honesty, not for fabrication.

This brings me to the most important advice I can give you. Your objective should never be to "turn hostile" as a strategy. Your objective should be to speak the truth in court. If the police statement attributed to you is inaccurate, or you genuinely did not see what the FIR claims, you are entitled to say so truthfully. A witness who tells the truth, even if it differs from the police version, is not committing perjury. The danger arises only when a witness knowingly lies to help the accused.

If your concern is that the police recorded things you never said, there are proper ways to establish this. You can explain in court that the Section 161 statement was not read over to you. You can state that it was recorded incorrectly, and give the circumstances. Your advocate can place on record any earlier complaint you made about the incorrect recording. This is very different from denying facts you have already affirmed before a magistrate.

If a compromise is driving your decision, there is a legitimate route to consider. The High Court has inherent power under Section 482 CrPC, now Section 528 BNSS, to quash proceedings to secure the ends of justice. In Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan (2019), the Supreme Court held that attempt to murder cases are serious offences against society. They are not ordinarily quashed merely because parties have settled. But the High Court may examine the nature of injuries, the weapon used, the stage of trial and the antecedents of the accused before deciding.

So quashing on compromise is difficult and never guaranteed, but it is a lawful option, unlike lying on oath. Where injuries are minor and the charge of attempt to murder appears exaggerated, the High Court may look closely at whether the offence was really made out. Your lawyer can also argue at the stage of framing of charges that the ingredients of Section 109 BNS are not satisfied. That may lead to charges under a lesser, sometimes compoundable, provision. These are legal routes that protect you rather than expose you.

If you are being threatened, pressured or offered money to change your testimony, the law protects you strongly. Threatening a person to give false evidence was punishable under Section 195A IPC, now Section 232 BNS. Criminal intimidation is punishable under Section 351 BNS. You can file a complaint with the police or write directly to the trial court. In Mahender Chawla v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court approved the Witness Protection Scheme, 2018, and directed its implementation across India.

That scheme has now been given statutory footing through Section 398 of the BNSS, which requires every State Government to prepare and notify a witness protection scheme. Under such schemes, a competent authority can order protective measures based on a threat analysis report. These can include police escort, concealment of identity, changes in residence, monitoring of calls and in-camera testimony. You can apply for protection before you depose. Seeking protection is far wiser than giving in to pressure and then facing the consequences yourself.

You should also understand that Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees a fair trial, and this right belongs to victims and society too. Courts have described a fair trial as one in which witnesses depose freely and without fear. If you tell the court that you are under pressure, the court can adjourn your examination, record your evidence by video conferencing, or pass directions for your safety. Judges are well aware of how witnesses in serious cases are influenced. You will not be judged for asking for help.

There is one more consequence of turning hostile that people often overlook. If you are the victim and received compensation under the victim compensation scheme of Section 357A CrPC (now Section 396 BNSS), your conduct may be examined. In some cases, courts and legal services authorities have questioned or sought recovery of compensation where victims turned hostile after a compromise. The court may also make adverse remarks about your credibility. These can affect any related civil or criminal proceedings you are part of.

Let me now set out the practical steps you should take. First, do not make any decision about your testimony until you have spoken with an experienced criminal advocate who has read the case file. Second, obtain certified copies of your Section 161 and Section 164 statements, the FIR, the charge-sheet and the medical records. Third, compare these carefully with what you actually witnessed, and note every genuine inconsistency. Fourth, if there are threats, document them with dates, messages and call records, and file a written complaint.

For personalised guidance on your situation, you can speak with the team at Aapka Legal Advice, where cases like yours are reviewed confidentially. You can also connect with experienced Top Criminal Lawyers in India| Aapka Legal Advice who regularly appear in Sessions Courts and High Courts in attempt to murder trials. They can advise you on your deposition, a quashing petition, witness protection or a defence against any perjury proceedings. Getting advice before you step into the witness box makes a real difference.

Where the matter is complex or the stakes are especially high, a second opinion from senior judicial minds can be invaluable. Aapka Legal Advice also offers consultation with a panel of retired judges of the High Courts and District and Sessions Courts, who work alongside its criminal lawyers. A retired judge can tell you how a trial court is likely to view your changed testimony. They can assess whether a Section 340 or Section 379 BNSS inquiry is realistically likely, and how a High Court would approach a quashing petition in your facts. That perspective from the bench is something few witnesses ever have access to.

If you have already turned hostile, do not panic. The court's power to initiate perjury proceedings is discretionary, and it is used only when the falsehood is deliberate and the interests of justice require it. If you receive a notice under Section 379 BNSS, you will get an opportunity to be heard during the preliminary inquiry. Your advocate can show that the deviation was due to a genuine mistake, an incorrectly recorded police statement, or coercion by the accused. Where threats were involved, courts often treat the witness as a victim of intimidation rather than a wrongdoer.

If a complaint is filed against you for false evidence, you can seek bail, which is usually available as a matter of right for bailable offences. If there is any apprehension of arrest in a connected non-bailable matter, you can apply for anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS, formerly Section 438 CrPC. You can also challenge a complaint that is legally defective, for example one not made by the court itself, under Section 528 BNSS. At the appellate stage, an order directing a complaint against you can be appealed under Section 341 CrPC, now Section 380 BNSS.

There are also counter-actions available if you were pressured into changing your testimony. You can file a complaint against those who threatened you under Section 232 BNS and Section 351 BNS. If someone offered you money, that too is relevant evidence of tampering and can influence the accused's bail. The prosecution can seek cancellation of the accused's bail under Section 439(2) CrPC, now Section 483(3) BNSS, for witness tampering. These steps protect you and preserve the integrity of the trial.

If you are the accused's relative or friend being asked to turn hostile, the same caution applies to you. Helping an accused by giving false evidence exposes you to prosecution and damages your credibility. It also rarely helps the accused, because courts today rely heavily on medical and forensic evidence. The best assistance you can give is honest testimony, and the best help the accused can get is a competent defence lawyer.

To sum up, becoming a hostile witness in an attempt to murder case does not automatically end the case. The case is prosecuted by the State under Section 109 BNS, and attempt to murder cannot be compounded. Your hostile testimony may be partly relied upon, and the accused can still be convicted on medical, forensic and other evidence. At the same time, knowingly lying on oath can expose you to proceedings under Sections 227 and 229 BNS, initiated by the court under Section 379 BNSS.

Your safest path is truthful testimony, backed by proper legal preparation. If you face pressure, use witness protection under Section 398 BNSS and complain about threats under Section 232 BNS. If there is a genuine settlement, consider a quashing petition under Section 528 BNSS with the help of an experienced advocate. Speak to a criminal lawyer, and where needed a retired judge, before you depose. That single step is the best protection for you as a potential hostile witness in an attempt to murder case, and the best way to walk out of court with your credibility and your freedom intact.