BENNETT UNIVERSITY, GREATER NOIDA

END SEMESTER EXAMINATION, SPRING SEMESTER 2020-21

COURSE CODE: LLLB221L
COURSE NAME: LAW OF EVIDENCE
MAX. MARKS: 35 MARKS
INSTRUCTIONS
1. Attempt any 5 (five) questions.
2. All questions are 7 marks each.
3. Answer each question based on relevant statutory provisions, caselaws and legal
reasoning within 700 words but refrain from verbatim reproduction of the provisions
or caselaws or any part thereof.
4. Use the answersheet word file released along with the question paper in LMS for
writing your answers.
5. The file name should be Roll Number - Name. Eg:- L19BLB999-JOHN DOE.doc.
6. Do not copy paste the facts from the questions.
7. Do not copy paste any question into the answersheet file.
8. Do not copy paste IPC/CrPC/IEA sections.
9. Do not copy paste paragraphs or sentences from any judgment.
10. Do not use any footnotes, end notes, bibliography etc. as the evaluation is not a
research paper.
11. Brevity, clarity and originality of expression are the safest bets against getting caught
in Turnitin.
12. Stick within the word limit as most questions can be attempted substantially within a
safe margin of the above limit.
13. Before each answer write the question number as Q1, Q2 etc.
14. Submit your answersheet with the correct file name in the appropriate assignment link
in Turnitin.
15. Only word file will be allowed for submission in Turnitin.
16. Submit your answersheet file within the deadline on the same day.
17. Late submissions in Turnitin or email will not be evaluated.
18. Non-word file submissions will not be evaluated.
19. Submissions with wrong file name will not be evaluated.
20. Submissions falling foul of the similarity index benchmarks will either be penalized
with marks deduction, disqualified for evaluation or reported as UFM to the
Examination Department.
___________________________________________________________________________

Page 1 of 4
1. John worked as a clerk in the Greater Noida branch of ABC Bank. The Vigilance
Department of ABC Bank noticed some suspicious transactions made in the second week of
February 2021. On being ordered by the said department, Paul the Branch Manager
questioned John on transactions made in Q3 of FY 2020-21 and John made the following
statement to John “I have been working as a clerk in ABC Bank. I misappropriated Rs.
25,31,452/- in the last quarter and Rs. 26,32,781/- in this quarter. I am stating this because I
am worried about my job as I am the only earning member in my family. The branch
manager has reassured me that no disciplinary action will be taken against if I disclose where
the amount has been kept or if I return back the amount. I have transferred the amount to a
cryptocurrency account.” John gives a verbatim reproduction of the abovesaid statement in a
written format to the SHO of the local police station.
Determine the relevancy and admissibility of the above statements made by John.
2. Thomas wishes to purchase a flat which belongs to Jonas. Both of them negotiate the sale
price over several phone calls and finally come to an agreement of Rs. 55 Lakhs sale
consideration. The sale agreement is executed by both of them with two attesting witnesses
Ruth and Mary who are their respective sisters and an advance of Rs. 20 Lakhs is handed
over by Thomas to Jonas in the presence of the attesting witnesses. The sale agreement is
registered at the local Sub-Registrar’s Office within 7 days after the execution. As per the
terms of the agreement, Jonas is to hand over possession of the flat and previous title deeds to
Thomas within 2 days of payment of the balance sale consideration. However Jonas has
refused to hand over possession of the same citing that there has been a change in the
circumstances between Thomas and Jonas. Thomas files a civil suit for specific performance
of the contract.
Determine whether the following facts may be proved in the abovesaid suit through oral
evidence-
a) Oliver had extended the date of payment of remaining sale consideration by 2
weeks
b) Thomas was to pay the sale consideration only by net banking.
c) Roger has agreed to purchase the property from Thomas within 2 months due to
favourable conditions in the real estate industry.
3. Mark and Mary are undergoing marriage counselling on the request of their parents. After
one counselling session, Mark says to Mary - “I am sorry but I have not been faithful to you.”
Mary replies back - “Neither have I.” Both of them stay in separate households after this and
file a joint petition for divorce by mutual consent. Before the final decree is made by the
Family Court, Mark has a change of heart and wishes to continue his relationship with Mary
who refuses. Mary files petitions for maintenance, protection and compensation under s. 125
CrPC and s. 12 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. During the course of
these subsequent proceedings Mary wishes to testify as to the conversation between Mark
and her after the counselling session.
Determine whether the conversation can be compelled or permitted to be disclosed as
evidence.

Page 2 of 4
4. Ms. X is the prosecutrix in the criminal case of rape against Luke. Adv. Mathew who
represents Luke asks the following questions to Ms. X during her examination in the trial.
Question 1 - What is your academic qualification?
Question 2 - What is your parents’ current marital status?
Question 3 - Whether you have been an accused in any criminal case?
Question 4 - Is it not true that you underwent an abortion after filing the criminal complaint
against the accused?
Question 5 - Is it not true that you filed the criminal complaint alleging rape after the accused
called off the engagement ceremony due to the COVID-19 restrictions?
Question 6 - Is it not true that you have been suspended from government service due to
dereliction of duty?
Question 7 - Is it not true that you and the accused were in a live-in relationship with the
accused?
Determine whether the above questions asked by Adv. Mathew are permissible questions
under the Indian Evidence Act.
5. Joseph is the accused in a criminal complaint of criminal intimidation and defamation filed
by Esther. During the trial the prosecution requests the court to issue a summons to Alex,
Zonal Manager of MNO Co. Ltd. which provided the SIM Card used by Joseph in his mobile
phone. Alex appears as PW-12 and produces a printout of the incoming and outgoing call
details of Joseph on the alleged date of the offence and an annexure which certificates that the
printout is a true and accurate statement of the call details of Joseph and that the details are
stored in the computer servers maintained by MNO Co. Ltd.
Determine whether the evidentiary value of the abovesaid printout with the annexure.
6. Samuel runs a fast food stall in Greater Noida which is next to the ATM of ABC Bank. On
16th April 2021, three persons wearing N-95 masks committed robbery at the ATM and on
seeing Samuel raising an alarm attacked him with sticks. Samuel managed to call his wife
and said -“I have been attacked by masked persons. Help me!”. His wife managed to contact
the local police who arrived at the crime scene within half an hour and took him to XYZ
Hospital. During his treatment for his injuries Samuel told the duty nurse - “I cannot
recognize the persons who attacked me but I think there were more than 2 persons who hit
me.” Samuel told the Investigating Officer who came to take his statement after the FIR was
registered -“I blacked out immediately on receiving the hit on the head.” Within 2 days
Samuel dies due to COVID-19 complications which developed due to his hospitalization at
XYZ Hospital.
Determine the evidentiary value of the statements made by Samuel to the different persons.
7. Jonathan underwent a cosmetic surgery for fixing the ridge on his nose at DEF Cosmetic
Clinic. The surgical procedure was conducted by Dr. Cain who has been running the clinic
for the last twenty years. During the procedure Jonathan suffered a heart attack and despite
the best efforts of Dr. Cain and his team, Jonathan passes away. A criminal case of causing

Page 3 of 4
death by negligence is registered against Dr. Cain. During the trial, the prosecution produces
PW-5, Dr. Abel, who went through the medical records of Jonathan at the clinic and the post-
mortem report prepared by Dr. Adam. Dr. Abel gives the following testimony before the
criminal court -“Victim died due to asphyxia as a result of air passage being blocked ante-
mortem. The post-mortem report shows that there is clotting of blood in the respiratory
passage. This clotting is due to the surgical incision made by Dr. Cain. I have appeared as a
witness in atleast ten other similar cases and have given similar statements. I am not
expressing this statement due to the influence of the prosecution. I have obtained my MBBS
from GHI Medical College in India and my MD from TUV Medical College in Russia with
specialization in ENT.”
Determine the evidentiary value of the above testimony by Dr. Abel.

*****

Page 4 of 4