Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies

(Affiliated to: GGSIP University, Approved by AICTE & Recognized by Bar Council of India)
Grade “A” Accredited by NAAC, Accredited by NBA for MCA, Recognized under Section 2(f) by UGC
ISO 9001 : 20015 Certified Institution

Academic Session: Name of Program : BA LLB

Name of Lovleen.sharma@vips.edu
Faculty Ms. Lovleen Sharma, MS. Rajni kheria Email Id of Faculty- Rajni.kheria@vips.edu
Total No of
Semester: V Paper Code: LLB 303 Credits: 5 Lectures: 42

Course Name: Law of Evidence

No of hours allotted per week:5

Objectives of the Course: This paper is to orient students with importance of evidence for establishment of claims and the related rules
and principles on contemporary basis.

Teaching pedagogy (Case Based Discussions/Problem Based Learning/Projects/Presentations/ Readings from books, magazines,
research papers etc.): The pedagogy would involve group discussions , presentations, judgement analysis and debates to familiarize
the students with the key principles of criminal liability as incorporated in IPC and to generate critical thinking among the students
about the objectives of criminal law and enable them to scrutinize the recent development and changes that have taken place in the
field.

Resources (Recommended Texts/Reference Books used, Recommended Resources):

Text Book:

Ratanlal & Dheerajlal, The Law of Evidence, 26th Edition Lexis Nexis,2017

Chief justice M. Monir--Law of Evidence, 11th edition, 2018, universal law publishing, lexis nexis.

Reference Book:
1. Sarkar --Commentary on the Law of Evidence.

Recommended Readings:
VIPS Case Study Manual Series
Course Outcomes:

CO1 Develop the ability to differentiate facts, facts in issue and relevant fact

CO2 Describe the concept of waiver of proof and the evidentiary value of Admission, Confession and Dying Declaration.

CO3 Explain the relationship of Evidence Act with substantive and Procedural Laws.

CO4 Enhance the methodology to draw inferences from opinions, expert evidence and presumptions.

CO5 Facilitate the students in appreciating the emerging areas of possible forensic techniques like DNA, Narco Analysis and analyse
the impact of social media on law of Evidence

C06 Analyze the impact of Social Media on law of evidence

Assessment Method Course Outcome Achieved
Class Tests CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5,CO9
 Presentations CO6,CO8
Objective type Tests CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5
Vivas CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5,CO6&CO7
On the spot assessment with explanation CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4, CO5,CO6&CO7
CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4,CO5,CO6&CO7
Take home assignments CO1,CO2,CO3,CO4&CO5
Program Outcomes (PO) -

1. Develop enhanced clarity on evolution, significance and implications of legal concepts in substantive law, legal theory, and
procedure
2. Gain proficiency in the general approaches to the study of law and legal reasoning from a personal and social context
3. Think critically on legal issues and learn models of planning and decision-making for a range of situations, including those in
which facts are currently unknown and not subject to confident prediction, and in which options involve differing and uncertain
degrees of risk.
4. Adopt a research aptitude to identify core issues and collect, analyze and interpret data
5. Gain proficiency in drafting that displays deep understanding on the interaction of legal analysis with human behavior, including
interpersonal dynamics.
6. Hone their core communication and presentation skills as interviewing, counseling, mooting, debating, negotiating and
mediating
7. Gain insights into the role of various institutions of law and experts in law and allied subjects.
8. Develop self -confidence and understand the demands, constraints, and methods of thinking in their role as lawyers
9. Understand the interdisciplinary nature of law and the contributions that other disciplines can make to the study of law.
10. Inculcate professional ethics and values and learn to collaborate effectively across diverse experiences, perspectives, and
identities

Map the COs with POs from 1 to 3 where – 1 implies Low, 2 implies Medium and 3 implies High
CO’S/PO’S PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5 PO6 PO7 PO8 PO9 PO10

CO1 1 2 3 3 1
CO 1 3 1 3 3 2
 CO2 1 3 3 3 1
CO 2
3 1 3 3 1

CO 3 CO3 1 3 3 3 1
3 1 3 3 1

CO4 1 3 3 3 1
CO 4
3 1 3 3 2

CO CO5 2 3 2 3 1
CO 5
3 2 3 2 1

Program Specific Outcomes

After the program the students will be able to
1. Accurately assess and understand a problem’s situation and objectives

2. Develop a plan of action and also be attentive to the need to revise the plan of action, the allocation of responsibilities for its
implementation, and/or the timetable for its implementation.
3. Plan a Factual Investigation critical scrutiny of the facts to assess: their accuracy and reliability; how they fit together; any
inconsistencies between the facts and the likely reasons for any such inconsistencies; the conclusions they support, and what
courses of action are appropriate in light of these conclusions
4. Collaborate effectively to diagnose address and solve a problem
5. Effectively express the legal issues through clear and articulate expression
6. Give advice on the options of litigation or alternative dispute resolution

Map the COs with PSOs from 1 to 3 where – 1 implies Low, 2 implies Medium and 3 implies High
PSO1 PSO2 PSO3 PSO4 PSO5 PSO6
 2
CO 1 3 3 3 3 3

1
CO 2
2 3 2 2 3

CO 3 3
3 3 2 3 2

2
CO 4
2 3 2 2 3

2
CO 5
2 3 3 2 2

2
AVG
2 3 2 2 3

Lesson Plan
Lecture Topic/ Contents Course Outcome to be Teaching Pedagogy Reading Remarks
No. Details with Achieved Material
subtopics

Evidence and its Rattan Lal

Relationship with Dheeraj Lal,
the Substantive Law of
and Procedural Lecture , discussions Evidence, Lexis
1. Law CO3 and case study method Nexis, 2013
Definitions: Rattan Lal
Facts, Facts in DheerajLal, Law
2. Issue, Relevant of Evidence,
& Fact, Evidence Lecture , discussions Lexis Nexis,
3 Proved, CO1 and case study method 2013
 Disproved, not
Proved. (Section
3) Oral and
Documentary
Evidence, Factum
Probandum and
Factum Probans,
Proof and
Evidence, Types
of evidence
• Ram
BihariYadav v.
Theory of State of Bihar
Relevancy: i. AIR 1998 SC
Logical 18501.4
Relevancy, Legal • DudhNath
Relevancy, Pandey v. State
Admissibility and Lecture , discussions of UP AIR
4&5 Reliability CO1 and case study method (1981) SCC 911
Section
6,7,8,11(Facts
not otherwise
Relevant (Plea
of Alibi)
Doctrine of Res
Gestae •
GentelaVijayvar
Section dhan Rao v.
6,7,8,11(Facts not Andhra Pardesh
otherwise (1996) 6SCC
6 Relevant (Plea of 241 •
& Alibi) Doctrine of Lecture , discussions HanumantGovin
7 Res Gestae CO1 and case study method dNargundkar v.
 State of
MadhayaPardes
h 1952
SCR1091 •
SharadBirdichan
dSarda v. State
of Mharashtra
AIR 1984SC
1622 • Santosh
Kumar Singh v
CBI (2010) 9
SCC 747 •
Rambraksh v
State of
Chattisgarh AIR
2016 SC 2382 •
Surender Singh
and another v.
State of
Uttrakhand AIR
2019 SC 399 •
Suresh and
another v. state
of Haryana AIR
2019 SC 67 •
Ashish Jain v.
Makrand Singh
and others AIR
2019 SC 343
Test • State of
Identification Bombay v
8 an Parade sec 9 and Lecture , discussions KathiKalu AIR
d9 Conspiracy Sec CO1&CO3 and case study method 1961SC1808 •
 10 NandiniSatpathi
v P.L Dhani (
1978) 2 SCC424
• BadriRai v.
State of Bihar,
AIR 1958 SC
953 23 • Mohd.
Khalid v. State
of W.B. (2002)
7 SCC 334 26 •
JayantibhaiBhen
kerbhai
• Kehar Singh
v. Delhi
administration
AIR 1988 SC
1883 • State v.
Mohammad
Afzal and others
Lecture , discussions (2005) 11 SCC
10 Conspiracy Sec 10 CO1&CO3 and case study method 600
• Central
Bureau of
Investigation v.
V.C. Shukla,
AIR 1998 SC
1406 49 • Veera
Ibrahim v. State
of Maharashtra,
Admissions (17- Lecture , discussions AIR 1976 SC
11and 12 23) CO1&CO2 and case study method 1167 59
Confessions 24- Lecture , discussions PulukuriKottay
13 to 16 30 CO1&CO2 and case study method a v. Emperor,
AIR 1947 PC 67
70 • Pakala
Narayan Swani
v King Emperor
AIR 1939 PC
p.47 • Palvinder
Kaur v. State of
Punjab (I )1953
SCR 94 •
Bodhraj v. State
of J. & K.
(2002) 8 SCC
45 76 •
NishikantJha v
State of Bihar
AIR (1969) SC
422 • Sahoo v
State of U.P
AIR 1966 SC 40
• Sahadevan and
another v. State
of Tamil Nadu
(2012) 6 SCC
403, • Ram Lal
v. State of
Himachal
Pardesh
CRIMINAL
APPEAL
NO.576 OF
2010 • Pyara
Singh v. State of
Punjab (1977) 4
 SCC 452 •
AgnooNagetia
v. State of Bihar
AIR 1966 SC
119 •
DipakbhaiJagdis
hchandra Patel
v. State of
Gujrat and
anothers
Criminal appeal
no. 714 of 2019
• Palvinder
Kaur v State of
Punjab AIR
1952 SC 354 •
Khushal Rao v.
State of
Bombay, AIR
1958 SC 22 86 •
Sudhakar v.
State of
Maharashtra
(2000) 6 SCC
671 95 •
Laxman v. State
of Maharashtra
(2002) 6 SCC
710 108 • Ram
Narain v. State
Dying of U.P., AIR
Declarations Lecture , discussions 1973 SC 2200 :
17 to 20 Section 32 CO1&CO2 and case study method (1973) 2 SCC 8
 • Ratan Singh
Gondh v State
of Bihar AIR
1959 SC18 • Tej
Ram Patel v
State of
Maharshtra
(2015) 8 SCC
494
• Jagjitsingh v.
Presumptions state of Punjab
(section 4 r/w 111 Lecture , discussions AIR 2019 SC
-114a) CO4 and case study method 292
21
•
.MaganBihariLa
l v State of
Punjab 1977
AIR (SC) 1091
•
.RomilaThaper
& others v.
Union of India
and others AIR
2019 SC •
.Ramvir v. State
Expert Opinion ( Lecture , discussions of Uttar Pardesh
22 and 23 section 45-51) CO1&CO4 and case study method AIR 2019 SC
415
Oral and
Lecture , discussions Rattan
Documentary LalDheerajLal,
24 to 26 CO2 and case study method
Evidence ( Law of
 section59-67) Evidence, Lexis
Nexis, 2013
ReenaHazarika
Burden of Proof ( v. State of
Lecture , discussions
Aasam AIR
27 Section101- 111) CO2 and case study method
2019 SC 22
• Ex Navy
Direct Entry
Artificers
Association v.
UOI AIR 2019
SC 387 •
PratimaChoudha
ry v. Kalpana
Mukherjee, AIR
2014 SC 1304 •
B L Are edhar v.
K. M.
Munireddy, AIR
2003 SC 578 •
Madanagopal v.
Chandramma,
Estoppel. ( 115- Lecture , discussions AIR 1965 SC
28 to 30 117) CO2&CO3 and case study method 1812

) • M.C.
Privileged
Communication(s Lecture , discussions Vergheese v.
31 and 32 ection121- 129) CO2&CO3 and case study method T.J. Ponnan,
AIR 1970 SC
 1876 136 • State
of U.P. v. Raj
Narain, AIR
1975 SC 865

Evidence by
Accomplice
(section 133 r/w • BhuboniSabu
114 illustration ( Lecture , discussions v. Emperor AIR
33 b)) CO3&CO4 and case study method 1949 PC 257

Rattan
Definition of LalDheerajLal,
Witness, Witness Law of
Protection Lecture , discussions Evidence, Lexis
34 Scheme CO3 and case study method Nexis, 2013

•
TehseenPoonaw
alla v. Union of
Examination of India AIR 2019
witness, leading SC 228 •
questions ( ZahiraHabibulla
Section 141-143) hSeikh v. State
Cross - of Gujrat Appeal
examination, Lecture , discussions (crl.) 446-449 of
35 and 36 Hostile Witness • CO3 and case study method 2004

Refreshing Rattan
37 CO3
Memory Lecture , discussions LalDheerajLal,
 (Section159) and case study method Law of
Evidence, Lexis
Nexis, 2013

•
GautamKoundu
v State of West
Bengal AIR
1993 SC 2295 •
Dipanwita Roy
v Ronpbroto
Roy AIR 2015
SC 418 •
RajendraPralhdr
aoWasnik v.
State of
Mharashtra AIR
Impact of 2019 SC 322 •
Forensic Science Selvi and others
Evidentiary Value v. State of
of DNA Test and Lecture , discussions Karnataka AIR
38 to 40 Narco Analysis CO3&CO5 and case study method 2010 SC 1974

Impact of Social
Media in Law of
• Shreya
Evidence
Singhal v Union
Electronic
of India AIR
41 and evidence in India, Lecture , discussions
2015 SC 1523 •
42 Section 65-B CO3&CO5 and case study method
Anvar P.V v.
 P.K. Basheer
(2014) 10 SCC
473 • Shafhi
Mohammad v.
State of
Himachal
Pardesh
(2018)2SCC
801
Remedial Classes / Tutorials
Session Topic/ Contents Course Outcome to be Teaching Pedagogy Reading Remarks
No. Details with Achieved Material
subtopics