QUESTION 1: WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE FOR PROVING A SHORTER STATEMENT WHICH FORMS

PART OF A BOOK OR DOC OR OR CONVERSATION?

Ans: Section 39
We must read whole because without it we cannot be sure that we have true sense and effect of
the first part. It is dangerous to admit only a portion of a conversation because one part taken by
itsekf may bear a different construction and have a different tendency to what would be produced
if the whole were proved .
For this reason Section 39 lays down that when a statement, to be proved, is part of a longer
statement, or conversation, or is contained in a book, or is part of a series of letters, the evidence
shall be given of so much of the statement, conversation, document, book or is contained in form
of an electronic record orseries of letters, or papers as the court considers in that particular case,
necessary of a connected to the full understanding of the nature and effect of that statement and
of the circumstances in which it was made. But that part which is not helpful in understanding
the meaning of the relevant statement shall not be proved.

QUESTION: IN WHAT SITUATION THE JUDGMENT OF PREVIOUS CASES ARE ADMISSIBLE?

Answer : Section 40
Section 40 lays down that when once there has been a judgment about a fact and the law
provides that when there has been such a judgment, no subsequent proceeding would be
stated, the previous judgment relevant and can be proved.

Section 11, C.P.C., lays down that no court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter
directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit
between the same parties or between the parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating
under the same title in a court competent to try such subsequent suit.

Exception:
Judgment of civil court if admissible in criminal courts and vice versa.-A finding on certain facts
by a civil court in an action in personam finding on certain facts by a civil court in an action is
not relevant before a criminal court when it is called upon to give finding on the same facts.
Similarly, a finding on certain facts by the criminal court is not relevant before the civil court
when it is called upon to give finding on the same facts.

Section 40 applies to a case in which the court has jurisdiction to decide a matter and one party
says it would not do so because the matter has been decided before. It must be remembered that
for a previous judgment being admissible under Section 40 the parties must be the same or
their representatives-in-interest.

QUES: ARE JUDGMENTS OF PREVIOUS DECIDED CASE ON THE SAME ISSUE ADMISSIBLE IF
PARTIES ARE DIFFERENT?
Ans : No. Section 42.
They are relevant but not conclusive proof.
A sues B for trespass on his land. B alleges the existence of a public right of way over the land,
which A denies.
The existence of a decree in favour of the defendant, in a suit by A against C for a trespass on the
same land, in which C alleged the existence of the same right of way, is relevant, but it is not
conclusive proof that the right of way exists.

Under Section 42 judgments are admissible not as res judicata but as evidence although they
may not be between the same parties provided they relate to matters of public nature relevant to
the enquiries.

JUDGMENTS WHICH SHOW MOTIVE FOR A CRIME ARE RELEVANT U/S 43.
QUES: CAN THE JUDGMENTS CONSIDERED RELEVANT U/S 40,41, 42 BE CHALLENGED>?
Answer: yess it can be challenged it if the party shows that was delivered by a Court not
competent to deliver it, or was obtained by fraud or collusion. Section 44
Section 41, 43 not understood.
QUES: IS COURT BOUND BY THE OPINION OF EXPERTS?
No. An expert is not a witness of fact and his evidence is really of an advisory character and
his duty is to furnish court with scientific test criteria to test accuracy of conclusions. Based on
such expert opinion and appreciating facts of each case, court must give its independent
judgment. Court should not subjugate its own judgment to that of expert or delegate its authority
to third party but ought to access evidence of expert like any other evidence,
State of Karnataka v. J. Jayalalitha, (2017) 6 SCC 263.

Where ocular evidence is cogent and credible, medical evidence to the contrary cannot corrode
the evidentiary value of the former, Ravi Kumar v. State of Punjab, (2005) 9 SCC 315.
Court must be cautious while evaluating expert evidence, which is a weak type of evidence and
not substantive in nature. It may not be safe to solely rely upon such evidence, and court may
seek independent and reliable corroboration in the facts of a given case, as a general rule of
prudence.

Sole evidence of a handwriting expert is not normally sufficient for recording a definite
finding about the writing being of a certain person or not. A court is competent to compare the
disputed writing of a person with others which are admitted or proved to be his writings. It may
not be safe for a court to record a finding about a person's writing in a certain document merely
on basis of expert comparison, but a court can itself compare the writings in order to appreciate
properly the other evidence produced before it in that regard, S.P.S. Rathore v. CBI, (2017) 5
SCC 817.
There is hazard in accepting the opinion of an expert, not because an expert is not reliable as a
witness, but because human judgment is fallible.

QUES: WHAT THE COURT MUST DO TO FORM AN OPINION ON INFO STORED IN COMPUTER OR
ELECTRONIC OR DIGITAL FORM?
Ans: S 45-A
Seek the the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence referred to in Section 79-A of the
Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), and it is a relevant fact u/s 45A.

QUES: ARE THE FACTS WHICH PROVE/DISPROVE THE OPINION RENDERED BY EXPERT
RELEVANT?
Ans: Yes, they are relevant. Section 46.

Each and every statement made by medical witness should not be accepted on its face value
where it is self contradictory The credibilty of expert witness depends upon reasons stated in
support of his conclusions but the data and materials furnished which form the basis of his
conclusion.

In Mohd. Jahid v. State of Tamil Nadu,3 is an important case on this

point. In this case the credibility of doctors' opinion conducting post mortem visa-
vis statement found in text book was compared. The prosecution made
suggestion to the doctor on basis of statement found in authoritative text book.
The doctor disagreed with the statement of authoritative text book without
giving any reasons. No other authority was produced in support of opinion. The
Evidence of doctor was self contradictory regarding her opinion about cause of
death of victim, cannot be relied.
QUES: HOW CAN COURT FORM OPINION ON HANDWRITING OF A PERSON?
Ans: By virtue of Section 45 and Section 47. Opinion of expert or person who is aquainted with
writing.( seen him writing or documents received).

QUES: HOW CAN RIGHTS AND CUSTOMS BE PROVED?

It can be proved through:

1. facts i.e., transaction or instances by virtue of sction 13.
2. Second hand opinion in case in which the declarant cannot be brought before the court,
whether in consequence of death or due to some other cause, upon the question of the
existence of any public right or custom or matter of public or
3. general interest made ante litam mortam; and the seventh clause of Section 32 refers to
statement contained in certain documents.
4. Opinion evidence by living persons u/s 48.
 Read section 49

QUES: WHEN IS CONDUCT CONSIDERED AS EVIDENCE IN PROVING A FACT?

It is important when he Court has to form an opinion as to the relationship of one person to
another, the existence of such relationship can be proved through their conduct by , as a member
of the family or otherwise, has special means of knowledge on the subject, is a relevant fact.
Section 50.

QUES: HOW CAN RELATIONSHIP BE PROVED?

Ans: 2 means :
1. Section 32, Clause (5) and Clause (6) make provision for proving
relationship. Under that section the statements of dead persons having special
means of relationship are admissible.

2. Under Section 50 the opinion of a person

alive is relevant regarding the relationship of one person to another. The
person having special means of knowledge may be testify before the court and
State. Under Section 50 such opinion may also be expressed by conduct.

he question is whether Bis son of A. One P appears before

the court and states that B is the son of A. This statement is not admissible
under Section 32 as under that section statements of dead persons are relevant. It
is not admissible under Section 50 because Section 50 needs opinion expressed by
conduct of a person having special means of knowledge. Now suppose P states
that A is his uncle; both of them live in one and the same house; B has been
living with A since his birth ; B has been brought up by A as son. B addresses 4
as father. In this statement P has special means of knowledge and has also
given the conduct and so it is admissible under Section 50.

S Whenever the opinion of any living person is relevant, the grounds on which such opinion is
based are also relevant.
Ans: Section 51
Would carry little weight with a court unless it is supported by a clear statement of
what he noticed and upon what he based his opinion.

QUES: IS EVIDENCE OF CHARACTER OF ANY PERSON RELEVANT IN CIVIL CASES?

Ans: No. except if character appears from facts otherwise relevant.
Section 52. A files a suit against B for possession of a house alleging that he (B) has taken
forcible possession of it. In this A cannot lead evidence about B's character to show that it was
likely for him to trespass.

QUES: IS PREVIOUS GOOD CHARACTER RELEVANT IN CRIMINAL CASES?

Ans: Yes. Section 53.
But in any case the character evidence is a very weak evidence ; it cannot outweigh the positive
evidence in regard' to the guilt of a person.

QUES: WHETHER EVIDENCE OF CHARACTER OF THE VICITIM’S PREVIOUS SEXUAL EXPERIENCE

IS RELEVANT WHERE THE QUESTION OF CONSENT IS IN ISSUE?

Ans: Not relevant. Section 53A

QUES: WHEN IS THE EVIDENCE OF PREVIOUS BAD CHARACTER RELEVANT?

ANS:
(1) When the .accused has adduced evidence that he has been of good character, the prosecution
can lead evidence to the effect that he has been a bad character.
(2) Where the bad character of the accused itself is a fact in issue the evidence of bad
character of the accused may be given. Under Section 110.(1).Cr. P.C.

(3) The evidence that the accused had committed similar criminal acts previously is
admissible upon the issue to decide whether the act was intentional or accidental.

(4) If the evidence of bad character is introduced in order to establish a relevant fact which
cannot be proved separately the evidence of bad character is admissible.

(5)Where the previous conviction is relevant as evidence of bad character, evidence of bad
character is relevant. Under Section 71, I.P.C

person is prosecuted for theft, evidence is sought to be produced to prove

that the accused is a bad character and has been suspected of theft and other
similar offences on several occasions in the past. It was held that this evidence was not
admissible.

QUES: WHAT IS REPUTATION?

Reputation means what is thought of a person by others and is constituted by public opinion ; it
is the general credit which a man has obtained in that opinion. When a man says that another
man has a good character, in this sense he means that he has heard many people speak well of
him. the evidence of those, who know the man and his reputation is admissible. Evidence of
those, who do not know the man but have heard of the reputation is not admissible.

Disposition.-When a man says that another has a good character in this sense he gives the result
of his own personal experience and observation or his own individual opinion of the prisoner's
character, as is done by ·a master who is asked by another for the character of his servant

As for evidence of character, evidence may be given only of general reputation .. Evidence of
particular acts, as of honesty or benevolence or the like are not receivable, "for it is not probable
that a man who has uniformly sustained a character for honesty or humanity will forfeit that
character by the commission of dishonest or cruel acts. But the mere proof of isolated facts can
afford no such presumption. None are all evil and the most consummate villain may be able to
prove that on some occasion he has acted with humanity, fairness or honour".

WHEN IS CHARACTER RELEVANT IN CIVIL CASES?

2 instances
1. Exception to Section 52 i.e., if character appears from facts otherwise relevant.
2. Sec 55- when it affects the amount of damages to be recovered, as in an action for libel,
seduction or in a proceeding in a divorce court. In enquiries of such nature the
compensation to be given must depend to a large extent, on the character of the
concerned, and the court must, accordingly, take notice of this in assessing the damages
to which such person is entitled.

A while driving his car on· the road, runs over B and breaks his knee. B files a suit against A for
damages. In this suit character of B cannot be taken into consideration in assessing the amount of
the damages and so his character is not relevant.

QUES: DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CHARACTER AND REPUTATION

Distinction Between Character and Reputation
Character includes both reputation and disposition. (Explanation of as a man with good
reputation may be
Section 55).

Reputation resides in the mind of others. Disposition resides in

the man himself
Reputation does not include character as a man with good reputation may be of bad character and
vice versa

Admissibility of DNA, baslittics, lie detercot. Narco analysis.

QUES: WHAT FACTS NEED NOT TO BE PROVED?
Ans:
1. The facts of which the court will take judicial notice. Section 56
It is called doctrine of judicial notice
57 : The Court shall take judicial notice of the following facts:
71
[(1) All laws in force in the territory of India;]
(2) All public Acts passed
Articles of War for 74[the Indian] Army, 75[Navy or Air Force];
76
[(4) The course of proceeding of Parliament

Read Section 57
2. Facts admitted and deemed to have admitted
Order 8 CPC

It is more suitable to civil than criminal proceedings. In criminal case, it is the duty of
prosecution to prove against accused and should not rely on admissions made by him in the
course of trial.

QUES:WHAT CAN BE PROVED BY ORAL EVIDENCE?

Ans : All facts except contents of doc or electronic records. Section 59
Not necessary that oral evidence has to be proved through oral means..i.e., statement of witness.
Any method of communication which is a discretion by the court will work. Ex: A deaf may
testify by sings or writing.

QUES: WHAT IS DISTINCTION BETWEEN RELEVANCE AND ADMISSIBILITY?

Question of relevancy- s.5 to 55
Admissibility- S. 56 onwards
Relevancy declares a certain fact relevant
Rule of admissibility declares as to whether a certain form of evidence abut a relevant fact may
be allowed or excluded.
The hearsay evidence of a relevant fact is not admissible.
Relvancy means what facts may be brough before court i.e., may be proved.

Oral evidence must be direct. Section 60

QUES: WHY IS HEARSAY NOT ADMISSIBLE?
Ans: Witness musy have been lied to by the person who told him.
Proper cross-examination cannot be done
Perjury trial will be very vvexatious and lengthy

QUES: WHAT IS THE EXCEPTION TO HEARSAY RULE?

Ans: Section 17 to 39
i.e., admission and confession

If hearsay evidence corroborates substantive evidence, it is admissible.

WHAT IS THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN DIRECT AND HEARSAY EVIDENCE?

The rule of best evidence- the best evidence should be brought before the court. Section 60, 64
and 91 are based on this rule.

QUES: HOW ARE CONTENTS OF DOCUMENTS PROVED?

By primary or secondary evidence . Section 61.
• Primary evidence- Section 62
Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the court.
Read section 62.
• Definition of “secondary evidence” in Section 63 is exhaustive as the section declares
that secondary evidence “means and includes”, and then follow the five kinds of
secondary evidence, J. Yashoda v. K. Shobha Rani
QUES: DISTINCTION BETWEEN PRIMARY AND SECONDARY EVIDENCE?
Read s 64 and 65. The condition laid down in section 65 must be proved before a secondary
evidence must be given. ]

Read section 65-B and anvar basheer

What are the modes of proving a handwriting?

Sectio

Section 68 to 73 not understood.

QUES: WHAT ARE PUBLIC DOCS?
IT IS A DOC PREPARED BY PUBLIC SERVANT IN DISCHARGE OF HIS PUBLIC DUTIES.
A plaint or ws is not a public doc because it is not act of public officer.
ANS: S. 74
(1) documents forming the acts or records of the acts—
( (i) of the sovereign authority,
(ii) of official bodies and tribunals, and
(iii) of public officers, legislative, judicial and executive

(2) public records kept 105[in any State] of private documents.

Certified copy of annual return of a company filed with Registrar of Companies under Section
159, Companies Act, 1956 is a public document in terms of Section 74 r/w Sections 610 and 163,
Companies Act, 1956, and is therefore admissible in evidence
DISTINCTION B/W PUBLIC AND PVT DOC?
QUES: WHAT ALL DOCS ARE PRESUMED TO BE GENUINE BY COURT?

S.79- Every document purporting to be a

1. certificate,
2. certified copy or other document,
which is by law declared to be admissible as evidence of any particular fact and which
purports to be duly certified by any officer
such document must be substantially in the form and purports to be executed in the manner
directed by law in that behalf.

U/s 79, the only presumption to be raised is the document is genuine but u/s 80 presumption
is that statement or confession were duly taken.
QUES: HOW DOES COURT PRESUME THE GENUINENESS OF EVERY BOOK PURPORTING TO BE
PRINTED OR PUBLISHED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF ANY COUNTRY,
AND TO CONTAIN ANY OF THE LAWS OF THAT COUNTRY, AND OF EVERY BOOK PURPORTING
TO CONTAIN REPORTS OF DECISIONS OF THE COURTS OF SUCH COUNTRY.?
Ans: Section 84 .
Sec 38
When the Court has to form an opinion as to a law of any country, any statement of such
law contained in a book purporting to be printed or published under the authority of
the Government of such country and to contain any such law, and any report of a
ruling of the Courts of such country contained in a book purporting to be a report of
such rulings, is RELEVANT.
QUES: WHAT IS THE PRESUMPTION BY COURT WRT ELECTRONIC RECORD?
Ans: Sec 85A
Court shall presume that every electronic record purporting to be an agreement containing
the [electronic signatures] of the parties was so concluded by affixing the [electronic
signature] of the parties.
Sec 85B
Presume that the secure electronic record has not been altered since the specific point of
time to which the secure status relates.
In any proceedings, involving secure 132[electronic signature], the Court shall presume unless
the contrary is proved that
) the secure 133[electronic signature] is affixed by subscriber with the intention of
signing or approving the electronic record;
s.85C
information listed in a 137[Electronic Signature Certificate] is correct, except for
information specified as subscriber information which has not been verified, if the certificate
was accepted by the subscriber