2 MARKS QUESTION

Q1. What an private document ?

Ans. Private documents are kept in the custody of the person to whom it belongs, and it is not
available for inspection to the general public. Example: A person's ID card, gift deed, passport
are all private documents.

Q2. About what facts evidence can be given ?

Ans. Evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence or non-existence of every
fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others.
Explanation.

Q3. What is the presumption as to electronics records 5 years old as per section 90 a?
Ans. Where any electronic record, purporting or proved to be five years old, is produced from
any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume
that the 2[electronic signature] which purports to be the 2[electronic signature] of any
particular person was so affixed by him or any person authorised by him in this behalf.

Q4. On whom burden of proof lies?

Ans. The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on that person who would fail if no
evidence at all were given on either side.

Q5. What is a secure digital signature ?

Ans. A digital signature refers to a more secure electronic signature that is generated using a
digital certificate and cryptographically bound to the document using public key infrastructure
(PKI).

Q6. What is a primary evidence?

Ans. Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court.

Q7. Who may testify as a witness in the court of law ?

Ans. Any person who has witnessed the event is competent to testify, unless – the Court
considers that they are unable to understand the questions posed to them, or unable to give
rational answers as prescribed in Section 118.

Q8. Who is an accomplice?

Ans. An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person; and a conviction is
not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.
Q9. Explain the meaning of plea of alibi?
Ans. Plea of alibi is the defense to a criminal charge to the effect that the accused was
elsewhere that at the scene of the alleged crime.

Q10. Burden of proof as to ownership lies on whom?

Ans. The burden of proving that he is not the owner is on the person who affirms that he is not
the owner.

Q11. Presumption as to dowry death?

Ans. When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it
is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty
or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the court shall presume that
such person had caused the dowry death.

Q12. Which fact need not be proved?

Ans. Section 56 – Facts judicially noticeable need not be proved – No fact of which the Court
will take judicial notice need be proved. This means that if the court is bound to take notice of a
particular fact, the parties do not have the burden of proving that fact.

Q13. Which facts can be proved by oral evidence?

Ans. All the facts and circumstances may be proved by oral evidence by expressing or speaking
except the contents of documents and electronic records. The contents of documents and
electronic records cannot be proved by oral evidence.

Q14. When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant ?

Ans. If they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact; if by themselves or in
connection with other facts they make the existence or non-existence of any fact in issue or
relevant fact highly probable or improbable.

Q15. What is dying declaration ?

Ans. A statement by a person who is conscious and knows that death is imminent concerning
what he believes to be the cause or circumstances of his death.

Q16. Define affidavit ? what are its contents?

Ans. An affidavit is a sworn statement or declaration in a legal proceeding, typically one made
by a person other than the defendant or plaintiff. In Indian law, an affidavit is also known as an
attestation. It can be used to establish the truth of certain facts in a legal proceeding.
Q17. What is conclusive proof ?
Ans. “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.

Q18. Opinion of experts, when relevant ?

Ans. The opinions of experts upon the question whether the symptoms exhibited by A
commonly show unsoundness of mind, and whether such unsoundness of mind usually renders
persons incapable of knowing the nature of the acts which they do, or of knowing that what
they do is either wrong or contrary to law, are relevant.

Q19. What is confession ?

Ans. According to section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, a confession shall be irrelevant in a
criminal proceeding if: The confession has been obtained by any inducement, threat or
promise. Such inducement, threat or promise was given from a person in authority.

Q20. What is the meaning of a hostile witness ?

Ans. Hostility is the state of bad feeling and ill will. A hostile witness is an unfavourable witness.
A hostile witness is one who from the manner in which he gives evidence shows that he is not
desirous of telling the truth to the court.

Q21. Define document give any 3 example ?

Ans. “ Document” 4 means any matter expressed or described upon any substance by means of
letters, figures or marks, or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which
may be used, for the purpose of recording that matter. Letters, sales invoices, wills and deeds.

Q22. Explain res gestae ?

Ans. Res Gestae is a Latin phrase which means that forming part of the same transaction. It
means that relevant portion of the event which is connected with directly or indirectly with the
main transaction of the event.

Q23. What is a digital signature ?

Ans. A digital signature is a mathematical technique used to validate the authenticity and
integrity of a digital document, message or software. It's the digital equivalent of a handwritten
signature or stamped seal, but it offers far more inherent security.
Q24. Define an admission ?
Ans. According to section 17 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, An admission is a statement oral or
documentary or contained in electronic form which suggests an inference to any fact in issue or
relevant fact, which is made by any of the persons and under the circumstances, herein after
mentioned.

Q25. What is a leading question ? when it cannot be asked ?

Ans. Leading questions may be put in cross-examination under Section 143 of the Indian
Evidence Act. Leading questions. A question is leading one when it points to witnessing the real
or obligated fact that the examiner expects and desires to be confirmed by the answer.

Q26. Explain in short judgement in rem and judgement in personam?

Ans. Judgment in rem is adjudication pronounced upon the status of a person or a thing.
Judgments in Personam are all the ordinary judgments not affecting the status of any subject
matter, any person or anything. The judgments of the civil court are the judgments in
Personam.
5 MARKS QUESTION

Q1. Professional communication

Ans. Professional communication is a specialty subfield of communication that pays close
attention to the theories and practice of communication within professional contexts. Fields
that utilize professional communication include athletics and sport, the arts, health and family
care, new media, small business and entrepreneurship, consulting, education and spiritual
services. Professional communication also plays an important role in the fields of medicine, law,
psychology and philosophy. All of these fields require the effective use of outward messages to
an often unfamiliar audience or public.
UT’s professional communication master’s degree is multidisciplinary, drawing students from a
broad range of fields. The program’s dynamic faculty also come from diverse backgrounds and
possesses a variety of scholarly and professional experience. They work together with students
to share and create new knowledge.

Q2. Refreshing memory

Ans. A witness may, while under examination, refresh his memory by referring to any writing
made by himself at the time of the transaction concerning which he is questioned, or so soon
afterwards that the Court considers it likely that the transaction was at that time fresh in his
memory.
The witness may also refer to any such writing made by any other person, and read by the
witness within the time aforesaid, if when he read it he knew it to be correct.
When witness may use copy of document to refresh memory. -- Whenever a witness may
refresh his memory by reference to any document, he may, with the permission of the Court,
refer to a copy of such document:
Provided the Court be satisfied that there is sufficient reason for the non-production of the
original. An expert may refresh his memory by reference to professional treatises.

Q3. Oral evidence must be direct

Ans.
 This is the cardinal principle of any evidence to be admissible in the court.
 If any oral evidence needs to be admissible, all the conditions under Section 60 of the
Indian Evidence Act must be fulfilled.
 Oral evidence and section 60 is a proportional equation. For acting out one, the other
needs to be fulfilled.
 The base principle on which section 60 is placed is that the evidence which is taken into
regards must be direct.
  The word direct does not include any category of hearsay as its main element is vested
in the word “must”.
 Every statement under oral evidence must be direct.

Q4. Admissibility of electronic records

Ans. It is the judge who is empowered by the Evidence Act to decide whether an evidence is
admissible or not.10 Sections 65A and 65B, which forms a complete code for the admissibility
of electronic evidence, were inserted in the Evidence Act through the Indian Evidence
(Amendment) Act, 2000.
The conditions mentioned under section 65B needs to be satisfied to prove the contents of any
electronic record.11 Section 65B starts with a non-obstante clause.12 Section 65B of the
Evidence Act prescribes the manner in which the contents of an electronic record can be
proved. The primary purpose of this provision is to sanctify proof by secondary evidence. This
facility of proof by secondary evidence would apply to any computer output, such output being
deemed as a document. A computer output is a deemed document for the purposes of proof.
The Evidence Act states that "any information contained in an electronic record which is
printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media produced by a
computer [Hereinafter referred to as computer output], shall be deemed to be also a
document" and if the conditions precedent in this provision are met, then such an electronic
record will be admissible "without further proof" or "production of the originals".

Q5. Plea of alibi

Ans. Plea of alibi means that the absence of the time when the commission of the crime
committedby the accused and the accused is convicted of the offence at the place where the
incident has happened. The term “Alibi” is a Latin word which means – elsewhere or
somewhere else. The plea of alibi is generally used in criminal law or criminal offence by the
complainant against the commission of an alleged crime done by the accused. When the
defendant pleads in the front of the court with the plea of alibi and the accused try to prove
itself that when the crime has committed at that time the accused is somewhere else, he has
presented another place during the offence had been done. In the simple word, we can say that
the accused was not physically present at the scene of the crime[i]. The fundamental rule says
that the burden of proof in the criminal cases always lies on the accused to show or prove itself
that accused was not present at the time of offence and did notinvolve in Section 103 of the
Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The Plea of Alibi deals with Section 11 of the Indian Evidence Act,
1872. It talks about that the accused will have to provide the relative evidence to prove that
accused was so for the scene of the crime any the time of the incident happened[ii]. The
accused was not committingany crime, and he is not liable for any offences.
Q6. Estoppel
Ans.The following conditions are to be satisfied in order to apply the doctrine of estoppel:
 The representation must be made by one person to another person.
 The representation made must be as to facts and not as to the law.
 The representation must be made as to an existing fact.
 The representation must be made in a manner which makes the other person believe
that it is true.
 The person to whom the representation is being made must act upon that belief.
 The person to whom the representation would be made should suffer a loss by such
representation.

Q7. Dying declaration

Ans. Whenever any offence has been committed, there is always the two persons, who
voraciously knew what actually happened i.e. the Accused, who commit the offence and the
other one is Victim, with whom offence had been committed.
In order to prove their positions, and make one’s story to be true, they give Statements to
judge but their story one can not rely on the veracity of statements which they made to
support their stories, as it may be prejudiced or untrue so generally, the role of Witness
becomes crucial to determine the truth.
But there is a condition when the statement made by the person to be treated as true evidence
in spite of the fact that he made the statement in his own favour and hardly any doubt behind
the reason for that statement. That condition is Dying Declaration.
Dying Declaration is a statement made by the person while he was dying and states the reason
for his death. The statement given by the dying person can be circumstantial or tells the cause
for his death. Hence, the only statement given just before the death of a person is called Dying
Declaration. The person who is conscious of Compos Mentis and knows that death is about to
happen can make a declaration and state the cause of his death and that statement will be
Admissible and treated as Evidence in the Court. Declaration made by the deceased person can
be in oral, written and by conduct. The word Dying Declaration explain the word itself.

Q8. Presumption of facts and law

Ans. Courts use presumptions[1] to form conclusions about the existence of particular facts. It
is not necessary for the party who is considered to be in the right to rely on presumptive facts
to bear the burden of evidence. However, presumptions are a type of an exceptions to the
general rules, which states to the party that claims to have discovered a given truth has the
initial burden of evidence.
To put it another way, presumptions are inferences made the validity or an untruth of the thing
by applying a simple process of likely to be reasoning to what should be taken for granted. It is
argued that a presumption operates when certain facts are presumed to exist even when if
there is no any complete evidence or proof of their existence. Presumption which is the rule
that if only one fact which is known as the main fact is proven, then another known as the
supposed fact is accepted as proven if there is no counter proof of the same.
Certain facts are routinely regarded the same way regardless of whether or not they serve as
verification of another fact. Where It is an the inference which is drawn from the known and
proven facts. Unless it is proven otherwise, judges and juries utilise the law of presumption to
deduce a conclusion from a fact or piece of evidence."

Q9. Admissions
Ans.
The word/expression Admission means voluntarily acknowledgement of the of the existence or
truth of a particular fact. But under Evidence Act admission is defined in a narrower sense. It
deals with admission by statement only by oral or written or contained in an electronic form.
Section 17- 23 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with Admission. According to section 17 of
Indian Evidence Act, 1872, An admission is a statement oral or documentary or contained in
electronic form which suggests an inference to any fact in issue or relevant fact, which is made
by any of the persons and under the circumstances, herein after mentioned.
Admission plays a pivotal role in judicial proceedings because if one party to a suit or any other
proceedings proves that the other party has admitted his case, the wok of the court becomes
easier.
The definition of admission is divided into three parts:
1. It may be oral or documentary.
2. Admission will be relevant only if it is made by any person specified in the Act. (this list is
to be found in Section18)
3. Admission is relevant only in the circumstances mentioned in the Act. (Such
circumstances are mentioned in section 18-30).

Q10. Conclusive proof

Ans. Incontrovertible evidence, or conclusive evidence, is a colloquial term for evidence
introduced to prove a fact that is supposed to be so conclusive that there can be no other truth
to the matter; evidence so strong it overpowers contrary evidence, directing a fact-finder to a
specific and certain conclusion.
A "conclusive evidence" clause may be included in a contract or deed of guarantee, having the
effect of showing that, in the absence of manifest error, the guarantor is liable to deliver on
their guarantee when their obligation is triggered: the Commercial Court in England and Wales
ruled on the effect of such a clause in the case of Carey Value Added S.L. v Grupo Urvasco SA in
2010. Conclusive evidence clauses are interpreted strictly by the courts, with any ambiguity
being resolved in favour of the guarantor.

Q11. Public document

Ans.
Public Documents are documents or records that are authenticated by the public officer. Public
documents also contain statements made by the public officer in his official capacity that are
admissible as evidence of the fact in civil matters .They are made available to the public for
reference and use.
Characteristics of public document:
 Public documents must be prepared by public servant in his official capacity.
 Should be made available for the purpose of public reference and use.
 Test of publicity is that the Public should be interested in such documents and should be
entitled to check the mistakes or errors in such documents and if there are any errors or
wrongs in it they are entitle to protest.
 It becomes a public document when the public has right to inspect such official
documents and those who are willing can obtain certified copy of the same by paying
prescribed fee.

Q12. Judge’s power to put question or order production

Ans. Section 165 of Indian Evidence deals with Judge's power to put questions or order
production the judge may, in order to discover or to obtain proper proof of relevant facts, ask
any question he pleases, in any form, at any time, of any witness, or of the parties, about any
fact relevant or irrelevant; and may order the production of any document or thing; and neither
the parties nor their agents shall be entitled to make any objection to any such question or
order, nor, without the leave of the Court, to cross-examine any witness upon any answer given
in reply to any such question.
The main part of Section 165 enables the judge to ask any question he likes, in any form and at
any time, to any witness, party, about any fact, "relevant or irrelevant", or to order the
production of any document or thing.
The parties may not object to a question or order, nor cross-examine any witness without leave
of the court.

Q13. Opinion of experts and the evidential value of thereof

Ans. The Opinion of an expert must be of corroborative nature to the facts and circumstances
of the given case. If the opinion contradicts an unimpeachable eyewitness or documentary
evidence, then it will not have the upper hand over direct evidence. The Section does not
provide for any specific attainment of knowledge or study or experience for, being called an
expert. Experts are admissible as a witness but, they are not to make a conclusion as it is a
judicial function.
The court also stated that it would be a grave injustice to base a conviction solely on the
opinion of handwriting expert or any other kind of expert, without substantial corroboration.
An expert deposes and not decides. His duty is to furnish the judge with the necessary scientific
criteria for testing the accuracy of his conclusion so as to enable the judge to form his own
independent judgment by the application of these criteria to the facts proved in evidence.

Q14. Statement of persons who cannot be called as witness

Ans. Section 32[1] and the subsequent Section 33[2]of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deal with
the relevancy of statements given by persons who cannot be called as witnesses.
There is a particular class of people who cannot be called as witnesses under Section 32 and
their statements are allowed to be proved in their absence. The list of persons is as follows:
 Persons who are dead
 Persons who cannot be found
 Persons who have become incapable of giving evidence
 Persons whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense
Case in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc. is
relevant statement, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who
cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot
be procured without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the
case, appears to the Court unreasonable, but they are themselves actually facts in the many
circumstances.

Q15. Relevancy of facts

Ans. Relevancy has been stated in Section 5 to Section 55 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The
concept of relevancy is based on logic and human experience. Relevancy merely implies the
relevant facts and signifies what facts are necessary to prove or disprove a fact in an issue.
Admissibility is the concept in the law of evidence that determines whether or not the evidence
can be received by the court. Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, when any fact has been
declared to be legally relevant then they become admissible. All admissible facts are relevant
but, all relevant facts are not admissible. Admissibility is a decisive factor between relevance
and proof and only legally relevant facts are admissible.
Relevancy of Facts:
1.Exclusion of a irrelevant facts (section 5)
2.Res-Gestae (section 6)
3.Environment facts (section 7)
4.Motive, preparation, conduct (section 8)
5.Supportive facts (section 9)
6.Evidence to prove conspiracy (section 10 to 14)
7.Evidence of similar facts (section 15 to 16)

Q16. Primary evidence and secondary evidence

Ans. The term ‘Evidence’ has been derived from the Latin word ‘evidere’, which means to show
clearly or to make certain, plain, ascertain or prove. In layman’s terms, the word ‘evidence’ can
be defined as a set of facts or information substantiating the argument or proposition put forth
by the parties.
Evidence plays a crucial role in every legal system. Each case that comes before the court of law
has to be supported by evidence, as it helps the court establish the genuineness of the
arguments made by the parties. From the stage of admission of a case in court until the
pronouncement of judgement, evidence plays a vital role.
Primary evidence is considered the best quality of evidence and is referred to as the documents
produced before the court of law for inspection. Section 62 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872,
explains primary evidence by stating that when a document is in various parts, each part of the
document forms a part of the primary evidence. But if the documents are merely copies of a
common original work, then they cannot be considered as primary evidence of the original
work. For instance, a movie script is written, and copies of it are handed over to all the
members of the cast, but the copies of the original movie script are not the primary evidence;
only the one whose copies were made is the primary evidence.
Secondary evidence, as the name suggests, is the evidence that is used in the absence of any
primary evidence and is defined under Section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Q17. A child witness

Ans. The testimony of children often leads to the question of the competence of the child.
Children are easily swayed. Their testimony can often be tutored and may contain
inconsistencies due to their inability to retain detailed information for a long period of time.
The question of how mature the witness is determined with the use of the 'VoirDire' test.
This term means "to speak the truth." While conducting this test the judge tests the mental
capacity of the child witness by asking the child questions about the child's life, like its name,
date of birth, the name of his/her school, name of the parents etc. if it is evident to the judge
that the child is unable to comprehend these questions and answer them then the child will not
qualify as a competent witness. They court checks if the child is able to differentiate between
right and wrong. "In the nature of the things, a child cannot be expected to exhibit the same
level of maturity as that of an adult and can be relied on in appropriate cases."
Q18. Comment on burden of proof and onus of proof
Ans. The Indian Evidence Act does not define the term "burden of proof." However, in simple
terms, the burden of proof refers to the legal requirement or responsibility of the parties to
establish the facts that will assist the court in reaching a decision in their favour. Therefore, the
duty to prove a fact in a lawsuit is known as the Burden of Proof. The requirements under the
burden of proof are covered in Chapter VII of the Indian Evidence Act.
Under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, sections 101 to 103 deal with the burden of proof in
general, whereas sections 104 to 106 deal with the situation where the burden of proof is
placed on a specific individual. The concepts of Onus Probandi and Factum Probans include the
underlying principles of the burden of proof. Onus Probandi is a general rule that requires a
person asserting the positive to prove it. A person who maintains an affirmative stance has the
onus probandi. The onus probandi is on the party seeking to strengthen his case with a specific
fact that he is said to be aware of.
12 MARKS QUESTION

Q1. What is burden of proof ? whom burden proof lies ? explain with the help of sec 101 to
111 of evidence act?
Ans.
 Burden of proof
Burden of proof in case of Criminal Cases. Generally, the most important rule is that a person is
innocent until proven guilty. Hence, it is the duty of the prosecution to convince the court the
accused has committed a crime which means that the burden of proof lies upon the
prosecution mainly.
 Whom burden proof lies
The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at
all were given on either side.
SECTION 101 OF THE ACT
One who wishes any court to render judgment as to any legal right or responsibility that relies
on the existence of evidence that he argues must show that these facts exist. If a person is
bound to prove the existence of some truth. The person’s burden of proof is said to lie on him.
SECTION 102 OF THE ACT
This provision talks about that, on whom the burden of proof lies. This section seeks to identify
the party on which the burden of proof lays, the burden of proof lies on the party whose claim
would fail if there is no evidence from either side.
 There are more areas of the burden of proof-
Burden of Proof in Civil Cases:
In civil cases, the burden of proof in the sense of proving a case is discharged by more
preponderance of probability.
Burden of Proof in criminal cases:
In criminal cases, the prosecution has to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable
doubt. The mere preponderance of probability could not do so.
Burden of Proof placed on the wrong party:
Where the burden of proof is placed on the wrong party, it vitiates the judgment of the court.
SECTION 103 OF THE ACT
The section places on the party who wishes the Court to believe and act upon the presence of a
fact the responsibility for the presumption of evidence. Such values remain untouched by the
fact that the statement of a particular truth is negative or affirmative.
SECTION 104 OF THE ACT
This section notes that if the admissibility of one fact relies on the presence and enforceability
of another fact, the party would be based on the assumption that the subsequent evidence is
admissible
SECTION 105 OF THE ACT
This section applies to the exceptions granted to the accused that will benefit from ‘the general
exceptions to the Indian Penal Code or any of the special laws.’ The fundamental rule allows the
Court to assume the accused’s innocence before it has been proved otherwise and it is up to
the prosecutor to determine the accused’s guilt.
SECTION 106 OF THE ACT
Under the aforementioned rule, any person who is claimed to be aware of a particular fact has
the responsibility of proving that such a fact is upon him. The section uses the word “Especially
in knowledge” which denotes that possession of such knowledge often transfers the burden of
proof to the possessor
 BURDEN LEADING AFFIRMATION
The basic principle that follows the act of Indian Evidence is to transfer the burden of proof to a
person who claims a fact or claim. The same is evident in the specific sections of the act. The
reasoning behind the same is that if a person argues something, he could prove the same as
well. These instances are available in sections 107 to 110.16
Section 107 states that if a person who was alive within the last 30 years is said to be dead by
another person, the person affirming the same must prove the death. Similarly, under section
108, a person who hasn’t been heard from in 7years and is therefore presumed dead, the
burden of proving that the person is on whosoever affirms it. The situation is similar under 109
which talks about establishing relationships between partners, landlords, tenants &principal,
agents and under section 110 regarding assertions of ownership. Whoever affirms it, must
prove it. The case is similar in section 109, which addresses forming relationships between
partners, landlords- tenants& principal- agents and in section 110 regarding ownership
statements. Someone who believes that will prove it.
SECTION 111 OF THE ACT
This provision talks about where there is a doubt as to the good faith of a transaction between
parties, the duty of showing the good faith of the transaction is on the party in a position of
active trust to the other.
SECTION 111A OF THE ACT
This provision says that in a troubled environment, a person accused of committing certain
crimes under the Indian Penal Code, such as conspiracies against the government etc., is
assumed to be guilty and must prove his innocence, thus putting the burden of proof upon him
Q2. Describe in detail theory of relevancy ?
Ans. The term relevancy has been defined under Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 and
it states:
One fact is said to be relevant to another when one is connected with other in any of the ways
referred to in the provision of this Act relating to the relevancy of the fact.
The relevant fact is factum probans.
They are not issues in themselves instead they are the foundations for inferring facts in issue.
The concept of relevancy is quite different from the concept of admissibility because the former
is based on logic and probability whereas the latter is based upon the law. Relevancy decided
upon whether the facts given are relevant to facts in question whereas admissibility decided
whether the evidence is admissible or not.
Relevancy according to Thayer had two primary foundations i.e. the court should not receive
anything which is not relevant which means that it should be without any exception and second
that whatever is relevant as evidence in the court should not come under any exception and
has to qualify all the necessary the required tests prescribed by the required law. For him there
were no legal rules (of relevancy). Thayer is of the view that relevancy is a logical rather than a
legal concept and this connotation is widely accept now.
According to Stephen, the term relevant elucidates that any two facts to which it is applicable
are so inter-related that corresponding to the general course of events either taken by itself or
in association with other facts either proves or renders apparent the past, present, or future
existence or non-existence of the other. Stephen gave the concept of legal relevancy because
he states that relevancy of facts is synonym to their legal admissibility. Therefore to sum up it
can be said that relevancy of any object (which is an evidence) either increases or decreases the
probability of the fact in issue's existence.
Scope and Applicability
Section 3 and Section 5 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 defines the term Relevancy. Chapter II
covers the Relevancy of facts. Section 6-11 of the Act not only tell about relevancy but also the
various situations in which the term relevancy is to be applied. Section 12-55 of the Act give the
particular instances of relevant facts. It also gives the procedure which is to be followed in case
the facts which are not otherwise relevant become relevant as under Section 11 of the Act.
It also covers the question of relevancy in case of situations where customs or rights are the
subject matter as given under Section 13. Section 16 gives the situation where course of
business is relevant. Hence, the Indian Evidence Act provides for all the situations in where
there is a question of relevancy.
Literature Review
As the researcher of the project, I have relied upon variety of sources for comprehending and
exploring the nuances of the issues that I have taken up in this research project.
Firstly, I referred to Ratanlal and Dhirajlal's Law of Evidence which was a very helpful reference
for understanding the concept of Relevancy under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and also it
gave me the understanding of a number of concepts like legal relevancy, logical relevancy,
admissibility and probative value which were the core behind this research project and their
vivid understanding made it somewhat easier for me to make this project.
Secondly, I referred to an article by Hock Lai titled 'The Legal Concept of Evidence" published by
the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. This article gave the difference between the concept
of Legal Relevancy and Logical Relevancy as given by Stephen and Thayer. It also deliberates on
concept of evidence weight i.e. strength of evidence. It also draws a comparison between
admissibility and relevance and how both these concepts find a place in the legal proceedings.
Thirdly, I referred to the SC Sarkar's, "Law of Evidence". This gave me a comprehensive updated
decision of the High Courts and the Supreme Court of India. This gave me a list of case laws
which I could refer to and how the various judgements have been analyzed by the courts in
India. The information provided in the book is quite lucid and accurate for Indian Evidence Law.

Q3. Define evidence ? explain different types of evidence ? explain their evidential value?
Ans. Refer Q 11
Q4. What is estoppel? Explain in detail law relating and different types of estoppel ?
Ans.
Estoppel
The term estoppel refers to a legal principle that prevents someone from arguing something or
asserting a right that contradicts what they previously said or agreed to by law. Put simply,
estoppel prevents one person from contradicting an action or statement from the past.
• Estoppel by a matter of Record or Quasi-record
Alike res judicata once a court has given the judgement, the parties, their representatives, their
executors, etc. all are bound by that decision. This doctrine stops the parties to a case, from
raising another suit in the same matter or to dispute the facts of the case after the decision has
been made by the court.
• Estoppel by Pais or Estoppel by Conduct
The elucidated meaning of ‘Estoppel by Pias’ is ‘Estoppel in the Country’ or ‘Estoppel before the
public’. It has been discussed in Ss. 115 to 117.
• Estoppel by election
According to the doctrine of estoppel by election the person receiving the gift or claiming the
right can enjoy one of them and not both of them. So Meena cannot now go back upon it and
take the other option.
• Equitable estoppel
When a person tries to take a legal action that would conflict with his previously given
statements, claims or acts, this legal principle would prohibit him from doing so. So, the plaintiff
would be stopped from bringing a suit against the defendant who acted pursuant to the
commands of the plaintiff.
• Estoppel by negligence
This principle allows one party to claim a right over the property of another party who might
not be having the possession of it. This reflects that the person being estopped owes a duty to
the other person whom he had led into wrong belief. The merchants needed a loan so what
they did was, at first pledged the railway receipt from the Central Bank to obtain a loan and
then again fraudulently pledged it to the Mercantile Bank also. The plaintiff, the Central Bank
had filed a suit for conversion of the goods against Mercantile Bank. It was held that there was
no negligence as Central Bank didn’t owe a duty to the Mercantile Bank and so Central Bank
was not estopped from having a prior title as ‘pledgees’.
• Estoppel on a Point of law
The Doctrine of estoppel does not apply to statutes but only to the facts. Estoppel, if applied to
the law would go against public policy and general welfare of the society. The principle of
estoppel can never be invoked for the purpose of defeating the provisions of law.
• Collateral Estoppel
The doctrine of collateral estoppel safeguards a criminal from being prosecuted for the same
issue as raised in the earlier trial in more than one criminal trial.
• Proprietary Estoppel
We often see promises being made and later broken. While in some cases we can do nothing
about it, but in certain circumstances, particularly in matters related to land or property, there
is a possibility to bring a claim to enforce a broken promise. This is called proprietary estoppel.
• Estoppel by Acquiescence
When one party, through a legitimate notice, informs the other party about the facts of a claim,
and the other party fails to acknowledge it, that is, neither he/she challenges it nor does refute
it within a reasonable period of time. The other party now would be estopped from challenging
it or making any counterclaim in the future. The other party is said to have accepted the claim
though reluctantly, that is, he/she has acquiesced it.
• Judicial Estoppel
It prevents a party from making conflicting or contradicting statements as to what was
previously said in the court as this would adversely affect the court proceedings and also cause
disrepute to the court. It was held in First National Bank of Jacksboro v. Lasater [5], a bankrupt
person by not following the schedule and preventing from giving all the information of his
property finally lead the estate to shut down due to bankruptcy. After this, he started claiming
a title over the property on the ground that the trustee never took any action against it. It was
held that the creditors were automatically entitled to the property and asserting title over the
property in such manner is not permissible.
• Legal Estoppel
He would be estopped by law from doing so. In such cases court is allowed to view the art or
work in order to understand what that thing was which was assigned and to decipher the
primary and secondary character of the assigned patent. This would also assist them in
determining the extent to which the doctrine of equivalents could be invoked against the one
infringing it. It is believed that the court would not make any assumptions other than that the
invention presented a sufficient degree of utility and novelty which would justify the issuing of
the patent assignee.
Q5. Who is a witness ? when is a communication said to be a professional communication ?
Ans. Witness is a person who witnesses any act or series of acts or a scene taking place. A
witness may be any person who has the ability to perceive a fact through his senses. A
competent witness may perceive any act from his eyes or ears or smell or sensation or touch or
any other reasonable mode.
Good communication skills are crucial to any profession and any professional duties.
Whether sitting in a meeting, attending an interview, or sending an email to a client,
communication is of vital importance. Professional communication is defined as oral, written,
digital, or visual forms of information delivery in a workplace. Professional communication also
involves various forms of speaking, writing, and responding within and beyond the workplace
environment. It is used in memos, letters, business proposals, and press releases.
However, the ways in which people engage with colleagues, clients, and business partners has
shifted steadily. People no longer have to be in the same office, building, or even country to do
business together. These changes have only made effective professional communication more
crucial. Poor communication in the business world could lead to loss of money, energy,
opportunity, and time.
 Professional Communication Skills
Professional communication skills are crucial for leaders, students, managers, and other
professionals. Some of these skills include:
Active listening. During communication, people should pay attention and seek clarity on
ambiguities.
Confidence. While interacting with other people, it is essential to be confident. This can be
done by maintaining cultural perspectives on eye contact and a relaxed body posture.
Nonverbal cues. Non-verbal communication involves different types of body language: voice
tone, eye contact, and hand gestures while communicating with other people. A friendly tone
and relaxed body posture make one look approachable.
Conciseness. This involves conveying a message in a few words. It is advisable to avoid using
words that may confuse the audience, and to keep peoples' attention.
It is crucial to make a person's skills stand out. This can be done by familiarizing oneself with
what others demand during communication. Self-awareness is one of the most important skills
in professional communication. It involves having an understanding of one's own personality
and behavior. Self-awareness helps a person understand how people perceive them and
anticipate the needs of others, and hence helps a person manage their responses during a
conversation.
Professional Communication Examples
The following are some professional communication examples:
Written communication. Any written message exchanged between two or more people.
Reports, proposals, emails, letters, and memos are examples of written communication in a
professional setting. Written communication is generally considered more formal than other
types of communication.
Oral communication. Communication with spoken words. For example, presentations, staff
meetings, business meetings, and interviews are all instances where oral communication is
used.
Visual communication. Visual communication can be incorporated when conducting an office
presentation, making company social media posts, or presenting at a conference.
Technology-based communication. In the 21st century, technology adoption has been on the
rise, including forms of communication. Some instances where technology is used in making
professional communication include conference calls, phone interviews, and video calls.
 Types of communication
While it is easy to think of communication as simply the verbal transmission of information
from one person to another, it is so much more than that.
Communication ranges from non-verbal, such as a glance and raised eyebrows, to verbal, such
as a change in pitch and tone. Let’s take an in-depth look at all the ways that we communicate
with each other.
1. Non-verbal communication
It is interesting to note that non-verbal communication is used both intentionally and
unintentionally.
2. Verbal communication
When we speak, we are communicating much more than just the content of our words.
We are also using pitch and tone, as well as the level of formality we use to convey important
subtext to the person we are speaking with.
3. Written communication
Effective communication by writing is a massively important skill, especially as more people are
working remotely and keep in touch throughout the workday through Skype, Slack, or other
digital mediums.
4. Visual communication
Visual has become the most used type of communication, driven by social media, YouTube, and
other platforms of the digital era.
As more and more people and organisations use these channels of communication, the more
we are used to, and even dependent upon, using visual communication to stand out in a
crowded platform.
Q6. Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts ? explain which facts are
relevant under the Indian evidence act ?
Ans.
To ensure that a judicial process does not linger on for too long, courts cannot waste their time
on things that are not important to the case. While there can be many things for which
evidence can be given evidence that does not bear on the case at hand, and has no use for the
court. This is the concept behind Section 5 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which says that in
any suit or proceeding, evidence may be given of the existence or non-existence of every fact in
issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others. A
person is not allowed to bring forward any evidence to prove or disprove a fact that is neither a
fact in the issue nor a fact that is relevant to the facts in the issue. This statement refers to two
kinds of facts – facts in issue and relevant facts. Let us see what they both mean
Facts in Issue
Section 3 defines facts in the issue. According to this section, a fact in issue is a fact that directly
or indirectly in connection with other facts, determines the existence, non-existence, nature, or
extent of any right or liability that is asserted or denied in any suit or proceeding. In other
words, facts in contention in a case are facts in an issue. For example, A is accused of murder,
or B. In this case, the following are facts in issue –
 A caused B’s death.
 A had intention to kill B.
 A was insane.
 A received grave and sudden provocation from B.
All the above are facts in issue because they are in contention and they determine the liability
of A. Their truth increases or decreases the probability that A murdered B. Prosecution will
have to establish the facts that prove that A murdered B before A can be convicted. At the
same time, the prosecution also has to disprove that any of the exceptions do not apply to A. A
fact in issue is also known by its Latin term – factum proband, which means fact to be proved.
A fact will be considered as a fact in issue only if the fact is such that by itself or in connection
to other facts it is crucial to the question of a right or liability. To be a fact in issue, a fact must
satisfy two requirements – the fact must be in dispute between the parties and the fact must
touch the question of right or liability. The extent of rights and liabilities of parties depend on
the ingredients of an offense. In criminal matters, the allegations in the charge sheet constitute
the facts in issue, while in a civil case, it depends on the provisions of the substantive law.
Relevant Facts
The word relevancy as such is not defined in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, however, the
meaning of the word is quite clear. The word “relevancy” means the property of a thing that
makes it connected to the matter at hand. A thing is relevant to other when it has a relation to
the other thing that tells something appropriate about the other thing. Relevancy of a Fact
means that the fact has a significant relation to another fact that is under consideration. When
two facts have a direct relation, they are relevant to each other. For relevancy, it is necessary
that if we take one fact, the other will be relevant only if there is a certain type of relationship
between them, which is pertinent in the given circumstances.
A relevant fact is also known by its Latin term – factum probans, which means a fact that
proves. Thus, if facts-in-issue are the facts to be proved or disproved in a trial, relevant facts are
the facts that help prove or disprove facts-in-issue. A fact is relevant if belief in that fact helps
the conclusion of the existence or non-existence of another.

As per Sec.2 of Indian Evidence Act, One fact is said to be relevant to another when one is
connected with the other in any of the ways referred to in the provisions of I.E.Act relating to
relevancy of facts.
Sec.5 to Sec.55 of Indian Evidence Act provides several ways in which one fact may be
connected with the other fact and therefrom the concept of relevant fact can be meted out.
One fact is relevant to another fact if they are connected with each other in any of the ways as
described in Sec.5 to Sec.55. If a fact is not so connected, it is not a relevant fact.
All facts are relevant which are capable of affording any reasonable presumption as to fact in
issue or the principal matter in dispute
A fact may be relevant as it has connection with the fact in issue, but still it may not be
admissible. For example, communication made by spouses during marriage or professional
communication, communication made in official capacity relating to affairs of state etc. are not
admissible though they may be relevant.
On the basis of logic and not of law it can be ascertained whether a particular fact is reasonably
connected with the main issue or not. So logical relevancy signifies reasonable connection
between facts. But logical relevancy is not the sole test of admitting such fact on the record of a
court. Admissibility is founded on law not on logic. Many facts which are relied as probable and
relevant, are rejected by law as irrelevant on the ground of public policy, precedent, remote
relation or slight probative valu.
Q7. Who is an experts ? in which cases are the opinion of a third person of experts taken as
relevant ?
Ans.
An expert witness is one who has devoted time and study to a special branch of learning and
thus he is specially skilled on those points on which he is asked to state his opinion. His
evidence on such points is admissible to enable the court to come to a satisfactory conclusion.
a) An expert is not a witness of fact.

Opinions of experts.—When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of
science or art, or as to identity of handwriting 35 [or finger impressions], the opinions upon that
point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, 36 [or in questions as to
identity of handwriting] 35 [or finger impressions] are relevant facts. Such persons are called
experts. Illustrations
(a) The question is, whether the death of A was caused by poison. The opinions of experts as to
the symptoms produced by the poison by which A is supposed to have died are relevant.
(b) The question is, whether A, at the time of doing a certain act, was, by reason of
unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing the nature of the Act, or that he was doing what
was either wrong or contrary to law. The opinions of experts upon the question whether the
symptoms exhibited by A commonly show unsoundness of mind, and whether such
unsoundness of mind usually renders persons incapable of knowing the nature of the acts
which they do, or of knowing that what they do is either wrong or contrary to law, are relevant.
(c) The question is, whether a certain document was written by A. Another document is
produced which is proved or admitted to have been written by A. The opinions of experts on
the question whether the two documents were written by the same person or by different
persons, are relevant. Comments Conflict of opinion of Experts When there is a conflict of
opinion between the experts, then the Court is competent to form its own opinion with regard
to signatures on a document; Kishan Chand v. Sita Ram, AIR 2005 P&H 156. Expert opinion
admissibility Requirement of expert evidence about test firing to find out whether double
barrel gun is in working condition or not, not necessary; Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR
1999 SC 321. The evidence of a doctor conducting post mortem without producing any
authority in support of his opinion is insufficient to grant conviction to an accused; Mohd Zahid
v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1999 Cr LJ 3699 (SC). Opinion to be received with great caution The
opinion of a handwriting expert given in evidence is no less fallible than any other expert
opinion adduced in evidence with the result that such evidence has to be received with great
caution; Ram Narain v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1973 SC 2200.
Q8. What is primary evidence ? what secondary evidence ? how to prove primary and
secondary evidence ? when secondary evidence can be given ?
Ans.
 Primary evidence
Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court.
Explanation 1. --Where a document is executed in several parts, each part is primary evidence
of the document.
 Secondary evidence
A copy transcribed from a copy, but afterwards compared with the original, is secondary
evidence; but the copy not so compared is not secondary evidence of the original, although the
copy from which it was transcribed was compared with the original.
To demonstrate a case in a Court of Law, bits of evidence are offered by both the gatherings
and certain systematized rules are appropriate to ensure that the evidence is offered inside the
limits recommended by law. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is the law that administers the
offering of evidence in judicial continuing whether Civil, Criminal, or of some other nature
except for wherein it has been barred by law for now.
According to Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Documentary Evidence means, All
Documents produced for the inspection of the Court; such documents are called documentary
evidence. Documentary evidence implies and incorporates all documents delivered under the
steady gaze of the Court for its review. Documents are isolated into two classes, Public
Documents, and Private Documents.
The creation of Documents in Court is directed by Civil Procedure Code and the Criminal
Procedure Code. The substance of documents should be demonstrated either by the creation of
a document which is called Primary Evidence or Secondary Evidence.

According to Clause (a) of section 65 of Indian Evidence Act, Secondary evidence may be given
of the existence, condition or contents of a document when the original is shown or appears to
be in possession or power of the person against whom the document is sought to be proved or
of any person out of reach of, or not subject to, the process of the Court of any person legally
bound to produce it, and when, after the notice mentioned in Section 66 such person does not
produce it.
Clauses (b) to (g) of Section 65 specify some other contingencies wherein secondary evidence
relating to a document may be given. There has to be compliance of section 66 of the Evidence
Act. Non compliance of Section 66 of the Evidence Act would make the application liable to be
dismissed. Which was relied in 2019(1) PLR 680, Jatinder Singh v. Jaswant Singh and recently in
Jagmail Singh vs Karamjit Singh, 2020(2) RCR(Civil) 510.
In a situation where Photostat copy of a document is produced and there is no proof of its
accuracy or of it having been compared with or it being true reproduction of the original, such
document cannot be considered as secondary evidence. In other words, Photostat copy of a
document is not admissible as secondary evidence unless proved to be genuine or is admitted
by opposite party.
Thus a Photostat copy of a document can be produced in evidence only when it is alleged and
proved that the original was in existence and is lost or destroyed or is in possession of opposite
party who failed to produce it or in any other circumstances mentioned in section 65 of the Act.
 Secondary evidence of Dying Declaration:
The Magistrate himself deposed on oath that he had given the original dying declaration to the
Head Constable whereas the Head Constable deposed that he had made a copy of the same
and given it back to the Magistrate. Therefore, the Court found that the original dying
declaration was not available and the prosecution was entitled to give secondary evidence
which consisted of the statement of the Magistrate as also of the Head Constable who had
made a copy from the original. Thus, the secondary evidence of dying declaration was admitted
in evidence, though no application to lead secondary evidence was filed.
In the end, rule of justice requires that the documents should be allowed to be brought on
record and it is for the court to decide at the time of deciding the final lis with regard to
authenticity, admissibility, genuineness of the document and as to whether the secondary
evidence fulfills the requirements.
Q9. What is admission ? what is confession ? explain in detail & compare them ?
Ans.
 Admission
According to section 17 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, An admission is a statement oral or
documentary or contained in electronic form which suggests an inference to any fact in issue or
relevant fact, which is made by any of the persons and under the circumstances, herein after
mentioned.
 Confession
Section 24 to 30 of Indian Evidence Act deals with confessions. Confessions should be
voluntary. There are four kinds of Confession a) judicial confession, b) Extra-Judicial Confession,
c) Retracted Confession, d) Confession by co-accused.
The meaning of Confession:
The expression confession means a statement made by an accused admitting his guilt. It is
an admission as to the commission of an offence. If a person accused of an offence makes a
statement against himself, it is called confession or confessional statement. Confessions are the
special form of admissions. Thus it is popularly said that "All Confessions are admissions, but all
Admissions are not confessions."

 Difference between admission and confession

1. A confession is a voluntarily made declaration in which the accused confesses their guilt.
Whereas, an admission is a voluntarily made acknowledgment of a pertinent fact or a
fact at question.
2. Only the one who is accused can confess. Whereas, any party to the proceedings of a
matter, their representative, and in some cases third parties as well, may make an
admission.
3. Only in criminal proceedings confession is allowed. Whereas, in both civil and criminal
proceedings, admissions can be made.
4. By the term confession, we mean a legal statement made by the accused in which
he/she concedes the guilt of the offence. In contrast, admission means acceptance of
truth or fact in issue or a material fact in a civil or criminal proceeding.
5. The confession is made in criminal proceedings only. On the other extreme, admission is
related to both civil and criminal proceedings.
6. The confession must be made voluntarily, in order to become relevant. Conversely, the
admission does not require voluntary expression so as to become material. However, it
effects its weight.
7. The confession made can be retracted easily, but once the admission is made, it cannot
be retracted.
8. The confession is made by the person under indictment, i.e. accused. Unlike admission,
wherein the admission is made by any person, who can be the agent or even a stranger.
9. Confession always goes against the person making it. On the contrary, admission is used
on behalf of the person making it.
10. Confession is a voluntary statement by the accused directly acknowledging their guilt.
Admission is a voluntary statement of a fact in issue or a relevant fact.
11. Confession can only be made by the accused. Admission can be made by any party to
the proceedings of a case or their agent, and in certain circumstances, by third parties as
well.
12. Confessions can only be made in criminal proceedings. Admissions can be made in both
civil and criminal proceedings.
Q10. What is documentary evidence ? is, electronically recorded evidence oral , documentary
are real one ? point act the difference, if any Indian law and English law on the point ?
Ans.
 Documentary evidence
Section 3 defines documentary evidence – All documents presented before the court for
inspection, to demonstrate or show a reality are called documentary evidence. Chapter 5 of the
Indian Evidence Act deals with documentary evidence.
 Section 59 Proof of facts by oral evidence
This section enacts that all facts except that of the contents of a document can be proved as
oral evidence. In a landmark case of Bhima Tima Dhotre v. The pioneer chemical co. It was held
that “Documentary evidence becomes meaningless if the writer has to be called in every case
to give oral evidence of its contents. If that were the position, it means that, in the ultimate
analysis, all evidence must be oral and oral evidence would virtually be the only kind of
evidence recognised by law. This provision would indicate that to prove the contents of a
document utilizing oral evidence would be a violation of this section.”
 Section 60 Oral evidence must be direct
There are 4 main principles of this section to be satisfied.
It refers to a fact that is ‘Seen’ by the witness.
This deals with the directness of oral evidence. Oral evidence can only be given by such
witnesses who have seen the crime/ issue themselves.
If it refers to a fact that is ‘heard’ by a witness.
Oral evidence can only be given by such a witness who has heard the crime/ issue themselves.
If it refers to a fact which could be perceived by any other sense or in any other manner, by a
witness.
Oral evidence can only be given by such a witness who has sensed the crime/ issue themselves.
If it refers to an opinion or to the grounds on which that opinion is held by the witness.
It means that if a person has an opinion on an incident, it should be solely his opinion based on
some grounds then only his testimony will be considered.
 Documentary evidence
Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act defines documentary evidence – All documents presented
before the court for inspection, to demonstrate or show a reality are called documentary
evidence. This definition also includes electronic records produced before the court. Chapter 5
of the Indian Evidence Act deals with documentary evidence. Section 61 to 90A falls under this
chapter. Sections 61 to 73A deal with the general rules for proving documentary evidence in
various cases, specifically Sections 61-66 of the Act, which gives answers to the questions that
how the contents of a document are to be proved. The content of documentary evidence can
be separated into three sections that are:
1. How can the subject matter of a document be demonstrated?
 2. How the record is to be proved to be authentic?
3. How far and in what instance oral evidence is excluded by documentary evidence?
 Distinction between Indian and English law
The distinction between English law and Indian law on the subject of dying declaration has been
elaborately dealt in the case of Rajindra Kumara v. State[17] Under English law, the essentials of
a dying declaration are as follows:
The declarant should have been in actual danger of death at the time when they were made
the dying declaration.
1. He should have had a full apprehension of his death is near.
2. Death should have ensued.
These conditions must be proved for the satisfaction of the judge before considered it as a
dying declaration than it can be received. Both in England and America, dying declaration is not
admissible as evidence whether any civil cases or in criminal cases; it is not admissible upon
charges other than homicide, or as to homicides other than that of the declarant.
However, these conditions are not provided in Section-32 Of the Indian Evidence Act. It is not
required for a declarant to be in expectation of actual death while making such a declaration
nor is it restricted in the cases of homicide. Because of this structure, it becomes increasingly
necessary to know that the dying person speaks the truth because if he does not die than still
declaration can be used as evidence against the accused. Moreover, dying declaration can be
considered as relevant evidence in both criminal and civil proceedings, whenever the cause of
his or her death comes into question.
Q11. Explain in detail what is evidence and kinds of evidence ?
Ans. Types of Evidence
According to the definition given in the Indian Evidence Act, evidence can be divided into two
categories:
 Oral Evidence;
 Documentary Evidence.
It should be noted that evidence can be both oral and documentary and also, electronic records
can be presented in the court as evidence, which means that even in criminal cases, evidence
can be presented by way of electronic records. This shall include video-conferencing.
Oral and documentary evidence can be divided into two categories:
 Direct or primary;
Indirect or hearsay or secondary.
There is also a category of real or material evidence, which is supplied by material objects for
inspection of the Court such as a stolen good or the weapon of offense.
 Oral Evidence
Oral evidence renders to the evidence that is mainly words spoken by mouth. It is adequate to
be proved without the support of any documentary evidence, provided it has credibility.
Primary oral evidence is the evidence that has been personally heard or seen or gathered by
the senses of a witness. It is called direct evidence as defined by Section 60 of the Indian
Evidence Act.
Indirect or hearsay evidence is generally not admissible in a court of law as the person reporting
the facts is not the actual witness of the facts in issues. However, there are some exceptions
made in the case of hearsay evidence where it is admissible in a court of law. Section 32 and
Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act, states the exceptional cases of hearsay evidence.
 Documentary Evidence
Documentary evidence is the evidence that mentions any issue described or expressed upon
any material by way of letters, figures or marks or by more than one of the ways which can be
used for recording the issue. Such evidence is presented in the form of a document to prove a
disputed fact in court.
Primary documentary evidence includes the evidence that shows the original documents as
mentioned in Section 62 of the Indian Evidence Act, whereas secondary documentary evidence
is the evidence that includes copies of documents that can be presented in the court under
certain circumstances or as mentioned in Section 63 and Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act.
 Direct or primary evidence
Direct Evidence is acknowledged as the most important evidence required for deciding the
matter in issue. Direct evidence directly proves a fact or disapproves of the fact by its virtue. In
the case of direct evidence, a particular fact is accepted directly without giving any reason to
relate to the fact. One does not even need to point out the illustration provided as the evidence
given by the witness in the court of law is the direct evidence which is sufficient enough to
prove the matter as against the testimony to a fact proposing guilt.
Also, at times the rule of best evidence plays an important part in upholding direct evidence in
a court of law. The rule of the best evidence is a rule of law that only includes the primary
evidence in itself. It states that if evidence such as a document or a recording is presented in
the court then only the original ones will be admissible unless there is a reason for not using the
original one in the court.
 Indirect evidence
Indirect evidence is that evidence which proves the facts in question by giving other facts that
are indirect evidence and afterwards, proving their relevance to the issue. The deduction that
can be drawn is from such evidence by connecting a series of other facts to the facts in
question. These indirect facts must have been related to the facts in question and have a cause
and effect connection.
Direct evidence is used in two senses:
 As against hearsay evidence
According to this opposition, direct evidence is the evidence given by a fact that is sensed by a
witness with his senses or an opinion held by the witness whereas hearsay evidence is the
evidence that what some other person has told the witness to have seen or heard by the other
person. This differentiation can be noticed in Section 60 of the Indian Evidence Act, where the
word ‘direct’ is used in contradistinction with the term ‘hearsay’ evidence.
 As against circumstantial evidence
Direct evidence is that evidence which goes expressly to the very issue in question and which, if
believed will prove the fact in question without needing any help from any reasoning for
example evidence such as the testimony of an eye-witness to murder, whereas circumstantial
evidence will not prove the issue in question but it ascertains the point only by inference or
reasoning.
Q12. What is dying declaration and its evidential value ?
Ans. Whenever any offence has been committed, there is always the two persons, who
voraciously knew what actually happened i.e. the Accused, who commit the offence and the
other one is Victim, with whom offence had been committed.
In order to prove their positions, and make one’s story to be true, they give Statements to
judge but their story one can not rely on the veracity of statements which they made to
support their stories, as it may be prejudiced or untrue so generally, the role of Witness
becomes crucial to determine the truth.
But there is a condition when the statement made by the person to be treated as true evidence
in spite of the fact that he made the statement in his own favour and hardly any doubt behind
the reason for that statement. That condition is Dying Declaration.
Dying Declaration is a statement made by the person while he was dying and states the reason
for his death. The statement given by the dying person can be circumstantial or tells the cause
for his death. Hence, the only statement given just before the death of a person is called Dying
Declaration. The person who is conscious of Compos Mentis and knows that death is about to
happen can make a declaration and state the cause of his death and that statement will be
Admissible and treated as Evidence in the Court. Declaration made by the deceased person can
be in oral, written and by conduct. The word Dying Declaration explain the word itself.
 Definition
In Section 32 (1) of Indian Evidence Act defines when the statement is made by the person as
the cause of his death, or as any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his
loss of life, in cases in which the cause of that person’s death comes into question. Such
statements made by the person are relevant whether the person who made them was alive or
was not, at the time when they were made, under the expectation of death, and whatever may
be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question.
 Reason for admitting dying declarations in evidence
A dying declaration is admitted in evidence that is truly based on the principle of “Nemo
moriturns proesumitur mentiri (man will not meet his maker with a lie in his mouth). Dying
declaration does not require any corroboration as long as it creates confidence in the mind of
the Court and free from any form of tutoring. In case Uka Ram v. State of Rajasthan[5]. Court
held that dying declaration is admitted upon consideration is made in extremity; when the
maker of the statement is at his bed end, every hope of this world is gone; and every motive of
falsehood is silenced and mind induced to speak only truth. Indian law recognises this fact that
“a dying man seldom lies”.
 Who should record the dying declaration?
Any person can record the dying declaration made by the deceased, but the person who is
recording the dying declaration must have some nexus with the deceased either
circumstantially or by some fact. However, the doctor or police officer hold more value as
compared to the normal person. As far as the dying declaration is concerned the magistrate
entrusted to record the dying declaration, as the statement recorded by him is considered
more evidential rather than statement recorded by the doctor, police officer and by the normal
person.
The person who records the dying declaration must be satisfied that the maker is in a fit state
of mind and conscious while making the statement.
 Recorded by a normal person
A dying declaration can be recorded by a normal person. As in some circumstances where the
judicial magistrate, police officer and doctor is not available, the Court can not reject the dying
solely statement made before the normal person. But the person who records the statement
must show that the deceased was in a fit state of mind and conscious while making the
statement no matter if the statement is not recorded by Judicial Magistrate, doctor and police
officer. The statement is admissible in a court of law.
 Recorded by the doctor or a police officer
If there is no time to call the magistrate keeping in the mind the deteriorated condition of the
declarant, the statement can be recorded by the doctor or by a police officer. But one condition
must be coupled with it that while recording the statement there shall one or two-person
present there as a witness otherwise the Court may find the statement to be suspicious.
Moreover, the statement record by the doctor, later endorses that the declarant was not in a
stable condition and his statement would not be considered as evidence, rectify by the witness
that the deceased was in a fit state of mind and conscious to make the declaration.
 Recorded by the magistrate
When the deceased statement recorded by the competent magistrate has deemed to be
considered as reliable and attracts the evidentiary value as he presumed to know how the dying
declaration should be recorded and he is a neutral person. Moreover, the magistrate has
empowered to record the dying declaration under 164 of Cr.P.C.
Q13. Explain the distinguish between direct evidence and circumstantial evidence ?
Ans.
Key Differences Between Direct and Circumstantial Evidence
So far we have discussed, the basics of the two types of evidences, now its time to talk about
the differences between direct and circumstantial evidence:

1. Direct evidence is one that signifies the commission of the offense by the accused in an
explicit manner. On the contrary, Circumstantial evidence is one that suggests the
background or factors, of the commission of the alleged offense, rather than actually
proving it.
2. Direct evidence relies on personal knowledge and perception of the witness presented
or observation of the fact. As against, circumstantial evidence depends on the fact from
which the existence or non-existence of another fact can be reasonably inferred.
3. Direct evidence either proves or disproves facts in the issue, whereas circumstantial
evidence relies on a series of facts, directly associated with the fact in the issue, that
results in a cause and effect relationship to reach a conclusion with an explanation.
4. In the case of direct evidence, if the judge is satisfied with the evidence beyond
reasonable doubt of the defendant’s guilt, then the guilt is proven. As against, when we
talk about circumstantial evidence, if the evidence does not directly proves guilt but
brings about an inference of guilt, which is beyond a reasonable doubt, the guilt of the
accused is proven.
5. While direct evidence is regarded as more powerful evidence than circumstantial
evidence. However, when it comes to reliability, effective and successful criminal
prosecution mainly relies on circumstantial evidence. This is because the testimony of
eyewitnesses can be false or misleading.
6. In a direct evidence, no inference, presumption, or reasoning is required to prove the
fact. As against, in case of circumstantial evidence, the same is needed to prove the
existence of a particular fact.
7. When it comes to suppression of evidence, circumstantial evidence is quite difficult to
suppress, whereas direct evidence can easily be suppressed or fabricated.
8. Direct Evidence implies the evidence which confirms a fact and in which the inferences
of the jury is not required. Circumstantial Evidence refers to the evidence wherein the
jury has to draw inferences based on the facts obtained linking it to the conclusion.
9. Based on Personal knowledge of the witness or observation of the fact. Fact from which
existence or non-existence of another fact can be reasonably inferred.
10. Provability of guilt When the judge is satisfied with the evidence beyond reasonable
doubt of the defendant's guilt. When the evidence does not directly prove guilt but
brings about an inference of guilt, which is beyond a reasonable doubt.