A complainant who changes their statement in court is a significant development, and in the right circumstances it can be the turning point that leads to your acquittal — but I want to give you an accurate picture rather than false certainty. Whether it results in dismissal depends on what kind of case you are in, what exactly the complainant has changed, and what other evidence the prosecution is relying on.

When a prosecution witness resiles in court from what they said earlier to the police under Section 180 BNSS, the law describes them as having turned "hostile." The prosecution may then apply for permission to cross-examine its own witness — a facility carried forward into the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023. This does not mean the court must discard the witness entirely. The court sifts the testimony — the earlier police statement, the court testimony, and the explanation for the change — and decides which parts, if any, are trustworthy and independently corroborated. A changed statement weakens the prosecution but does not automatically collapse the case.

Where the result is most decisive is in Patna cases where the complainant is the sole or central witness with no independent corroboration — a common situation in neighbourhood disputes in areas like Kankarbagh, Rajendra Nagar, and Patna Sadar where FIRs arise from personal conflicts. When that witness resiles and there is no forensic evidence, no CCTV, and no independent testimony to fill the gap, the prosecution's case often becomes impossible to sustain and acquittal on the benefit of the doubt follows. Your counsel's task is to exploit the contradiction systematically — pinning it down in cross-examination, highlighting the absence of corroboration in closing arguments, and building the case that the prosecution has failed to prove its charge. The experienced criminal trial advocates and retired judges at the Patna panel of Aapka Legal Advice can assess whether the changed statement in your case is strong enough to deliver the result you are hoping for.

What I urge is active rather than passive use of this development. Do not assume the case will collapse on its own. Let your counsel press the advantage methodically.