*Vinod Kumar V. State (GNCTD) (2025 SC)* The SC has made the following observations on the correct procedure of contradicting a Witness on the basis of his S.161 CrPC statements: “ Before we part with the judgment, we must refer to a peculiar practice followed by the trial court. Witnesses were confronted in the cross-examination with their statements u/s.161 CrPC. In the depositions, it is mentioned that the attention of the witness was invited to a particular portion of the prior statement. After recording the answer of the witness, the portion of the prior statement used to contradict the witness has been reproduced in brackets. The law is well settled. The portion of the prior statement shown to the witness for contradicting the witness must be proved through the investigating officer. Unless the said portion of the prior statement used for contradiction is proved, it cannot be reproduced in the deposition of the witnesses. The correct procedure is that the trial judge should mark the portions of the prior statements used for contradicting the witness. The said portion can be put in a bracket and marked as AA, BB etc. The marked portions cannot form a part of the deposition, unless the same are proved. *NOTE*: As per me, this is an incomplete understanding of the S.145 IEA. As held in *Tahsildar Singh V. State of UP (1959 SC)*, *Bhagwan Singh V. State of Punjab (1952 SC)* : Resort to S.145 is necessary, only if the witness denies that he has made the prior statement. Then only it would be necessary to prove that the witness has made the prior statement through the investigating officer. If the witness admits the making of the prior statement, then the previous statement in writing need not be proved.