EVIDENCE VIVA

1. Section 17 of Indian Evidence Act, defines admission as any statement made in either
form such as oral, documentary or in electronic form which has enough probative
value to suggest or conclude any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact
2. the confession is something which is made by the person who is charged with any
criminal offences and such statements conferred by him shall be suggesting a
conclusion as to any fact in issue or as to relevant facts. The statements may infer any
reasoning for concluding or suggesting that he is guilty of a crime.
3. Word “Dying Declaration” means a statement written or verbal of relevant facts made
by a person, who is dead. It is the statement of a person who had died explaining the
circumstances of his death 32(1)
4. Section 133 of The Evidence Act, 1872, a person must be an accomplice. An
accomplice is a person who has taken part in the commission of the crime, along with
another or others. If an accomplice is arrested and thereafter has been given a pardon,
he is referred to as an approver.
5. Alibi is a Latin word, which means elsewhere. It is used when the accused takes the
plea that when the occurrence took place he was elsewhere. In such a situation the
prosecution has to discharge the burden satisfactorily. Once the prosecution is
successful in discharging the burden it is incumbent on the accused who takes the
place of alibi to prove it with absolute certainly
6. In the law of evidence, a credible witness is a person making testimony in a court or
other tribunal, or acting otherwise as a witness, whose credibility is unimpeachable. A
witness may have more or less credibility, or no credibility at all. Section 155 deals
with manners by which the credit of a witness may be impeached. Impeaching the
credit of witness means exposing him before the court as what is real character, so
that the court does not trust him.
7. Leading questions as per Sec 141 of Indian Evidence Act means: a question asked in a
way that is intended to produce a desired answer.
 The examination of a witness by the party who calls him shall be called his
examination in-chief.
 Cross-examination- The examination of a witness by the adverse party shall be
called his cross-examination.
  Re-examination- The examination of a witness, subsequent to the cross-
examination by the party who called him, shall be called his re-examination
8. When the court needs an opinion in a subject which requires special assistance, the
court calls an expert, a specially skilled person. ... This person will be known as an
expert and the opinion which he gives in the case is relevant. Expert is defined under
section 45 of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
9. The best evidence rule is a rule in law which states that when evidence such as a
document or recording is presented, only the original will be accepted unless there is a
legitimate reason that the original cannot be used.
10. Oral evidence is defined under section 3 (under evidence head) which explains that
“All statements which the court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses,
in relation to matters of fact under inquiry, such statements are called as oral
evidence.
11. Public documents are prepared by public servants while discharging their official or
public duty. Private documents are those documents that are prepared by a person in
his private interest and right.
12. Conclusive proof” When one fact is declared by this Act to be conclusive proof of
another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and shall
not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it.
13. a rebuttable presumption (in Latin, praesumptio iuris tantum) is an assumption made
by a court that is taken to be true unless someone comes forward to contest it and
prove otherwise. For example, a defendant in a criminal case is presumed innocent
proved guilty
14. irrebuttable presumptions, praesumptio iuris et de iure in Latin, are also known as
conclusive presumptions as they are the ones which cannot be disproved and the court
is under obligation to draw the conclusion and no evidence is receivable to dislodgeil