In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court hold that, where the witness became confused in…

In State of Rajasthan v Ani alias Hanif (1997), the Supreme Court upheld the trial judge's questioning of a witness who had become confused, holding that section 165 of the Evidence Act gives the judge wide power to put questions in order to discover the truth. The other cases deal with unrelated questions, such as the re-promulgation of ordinances (D.C. Wadhwa) and the amendment of Fundamental Rights (Shankari Prasad).

Current law: For proceedings governed by the BSA from 1 July 2024, section 168 permits questions the Judge considers necessary to discover or obtain proof of relevant facts. It replaces the IEA wording “any question he pleases” about a fact “relevant or irrelevant”; relevance, proof, privilege and improper-question safeguards remain. BSA section 170(2) preserves the former Act for specified pending matters.