Indian Evidence Act
Part C
(April / May 2022)
1. ‘X’ is charged for committing a crime at Hyderabad on a certain day. He wants to
prove the fact that he was at Tirupati on that day. Is it a relevant fact? Which
provision of the evidence act deals with it. (Similar Question December 2021)
‘A’ is charged for committing an offence at Warangal on a certain day. He wants
to prove that he was at Hyderabad on that day. Is it relevant? Discuss the
relevant provisions of the Evidence Act. (Similar Question Aug/Sept 2015)
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘X’ is charged for committing a crime at Hyderabad on a certain day. He wants to prove the
fact that he was at Tirupati on that day.
Solution
X has brought evidence to prove that he was at Tirupati on that day of crime charged against
him. If the evidence adduced by X is believable and the Court satisfies with that evidence, it
is a relevant fact under the provisions of Section 11 of the Indian Evidence Act.
2. A Married girl wrote a letter to her parents complaining that she was subjected
to cruelty by her husband in connection with demand for dowry. After one month
she died under suspicious circumstances. In the trail, the prosecution produced
the letter written by deceased. Is it relevant? If yes, under what provision of
the Evidence act it becomes relevant? (Similar Question November 2020)
A daughter-in-law wrote a letter to her parents complaining that there was danger
to her life from her in laws. One week after writing the letter, she died under
suspicious circumstances. Is the letter by the deceased daughter-in-law relevant?
Discuss. (Similar Question Aug/Sep 2014)
Ans:
Facts of the Case
A Married girl wrote a letter to her parents complaining that she was subjected to cruelty by
her husband in connection with demand for dowry. After one month she died under suspicious
circumstances. In the trail, the prosecution produced the letter written by deceased.
Solution
Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act defines Presumption as to dowry death as “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
1
harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the court shall presume that
such person had caused the dowry death”
The fact of the problem arose in Ajay Singh Vs State (1998 CrLJ 3178 J&K) case. Jammu &
Kashmir High Court held that the statutory presumption under Section 113 B can be drawn
against the accused in such case.
3. ‘X’ agrees in writing, to sell his property to ‘Y’ for Rs. 2crores or Rs. 2.5 Crores
in a case before the court, ‘X’ tries to produce the oral evidence to show which
price was to be given. Is it permissible? Discuss the provision of the Evidence act
that is applicable.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘X’ agrees in writing, to sell his property to ‘Y’ for Rs. 2crores or Rs. 2.5 Crores in a case
before the court, ‘X’ tries to produce the oral evidence to show which price was to be given.
Solution
In this instant case X tries to produce the oral evidence to show which price was to be given
for his property and is not documentary evidence, if it is supported by documentary evidence
the court will admit as best evidence. In this case X has tried to produce the oral evidence
that may be hearsay evidence but it requires supporting expert opinion and court may refer
the matter to ascertain the fact to Registration Department, whose evidence is valued as
best evidence as contemplated Section 59 read with the provisions of Section 45 of the
evidence Act.
4. A Witness produced by the accused for defence is not favorable to him, but
favorable to prosecution. What is the procedure the defence counsel has to follow
in such a situation? How to overcome this difficulty by the defence counsel?
Ans:
Facts of the Case
What is the procedure the defence counsel has to follow in such a situation. When a witness
produced by the accused for defence is not favorable to him, but favorable to prosecution.
Solution
When the produced by the accused for defence is not favorable to him, but favorable to
prosecution, the defence council had an option of re-examination of the witness by asking
leading questions as contemplated under section 137 read with provisions of the sections 154
of the evidence Act to ascertain favorable to accused.
December 2021
5. A Statement was made by the accused to a police officer that he committed theft
and kept the stolen goods in his friend’s house. Accordingly, the police recovered
2
the stolen goods from that house. Discuss whether the statement made by the
accused can be used against him in the trail. Refer to relevant provision of the
Evidence Act.
A statement was made by the accused in the custody of police, as a result number
of stolen goods were recovered by the police from a secret place. On trial, the
police and the prosecution wanted to prove that statement made by the accused
against him. Is it permissible? Refer to the relevant provision of the Evidence
act. (Nov 2020) (Sept 2018)
Ans:
Facts of the Case
A Statement was made by the accused to a police officer that he committed theft and kept
the stolen goods in his friend’s house. Accordingly, the police recovered the stolen goods from
that house.
Solution
Based on the statement made by the accused to police officer that he committed theft and
kept the stolen goods in his friend’s house and accordingly, the police recovered the stolen
goods from that house. Recovery of the stolen goods kept from his friend’s house is
collaborative evidence. As per Section 156 – 157 of the Indian Evidence Act, such
collaborative evidence can be used against the accused.
6. After commission of an offence, the offender approached an advocate for defence
and told him how he committed the offence. In the trail, the advocate wants to
disclose it to the court. Can he do so? Discuss.
‘A’ client says to ‘B’ an attorney, “I have committed murder of ‘C’ and I wish you
to defend me”. Can this communication be disclosed by an attorney? (Sept 2018)
Ans:
Facts of the Case
After commission of an offence, the offender approached an advocate for defence and told
him how he committed the offence.
Solution
As per section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act legal counsel/advocate shall at any time be
permitted, unless with his client’s express consent, to disclose any communication made to him
in the course and for the purpose of his employment, provided that nothing in the said section
shall protect from disclosure any such communication made in furtherance of any illegal
purpose.
In this instant case after commission of an offence, A an offender approached B an advocate
for defence and told him how he committed the offence and during trail B an advocate wants
3
to disclose it to the court as contemplated in section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act. Hence,
the intention of Advocate is a lawful action.
7. In a civil suit, the plaintiff obtained certified copies of public document and
produced them in the court as evidence. The defendant objected to it on the
ground that certified copies are secondary evidence. Is the objection sustainable?
Decide in the light of provisions of the Evidence act.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
In a civil suit, the plaintiff obtained certified copies of public document and produced them
in the court as evidence. The defendant objected to it on the ground that certified copies
are secondary evidence.
Solution
AS per sub clause (e) of the Section 65 certified copies of public document is admissible as
secondary evidence in a Court of Law, hence the objection raised by defendant is not
sustainable.
SEPTEMBER 2019
8. In a Case of an indecent assault upon a young girl, shortly after the incident the
girl made certain statement to her mother by which she described the offence
and the man who assaulted her. Is the statement made by the girl admissible as
res gestae? Examine with the help of decided cases.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
In a Case of an indecent assault upon a young girl, shortly after the incident the girl made
certain statement to her mother by which she described the offence and the man who
assaulted her.
Solution
A reasonable effort was made by the framers of the Indian Evidence Act to absorb the
Doctrine of Res Gestae and Section 6 of the Act solely deals with the application of res
gestae. As per Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act “facts which, though not in issue, are so
connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether
they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places.”
Case law: Bishna vs State of West Bengal Criminal Appeal No. 1430 of 2003
In this case both witnesses arrived in an unconscious state immediately after the incident
and found the dead body of Prankrishna and wounded Nepal. One of them found Prannkrishna’s
and Nepal’s mother weeping and heard from an eyewitness that their testimony was admissible
4
under Section 6 of the Evidence Act about the whole incident and the role played by each of
the appellants
In this instant case, an indecent assault upon a young girl, shortly after the incident the girl
made certain statement to her mother by which she described the offence and the man who
assaulted her. Hence the statement made by the girl admissible as res gestae
9. ‘A’ prosecuted ‘B’ for adultery with ‘C’, ‘A’ s wife. ‘B’ denies that ‘C’ is ‘A’s wife,
but the court convicts ‘B’ for adultery. Afterwards ‘C’ is prosecuted for bigamy in
marrying ‘B’ during A’s life time. ‘C’ says that she never was ‘A’s wife. Decide
whether the judgement against ‘B’ is relevant as against ‘C’ refer to the relevant
provision of the evidence act.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘A’ prosecuted ‘B’ for adultery with ‘C, ‘A’ s wife. ‘B’ denies that ‘C’ is ‘A’s wife, but the court
convicts ‘B’ for adultery. Afterwards ‘C’ is prosecuted for bigamy in marrying ‘B’ during A’s life
time. ‘C’ says that she never was ‘A’s wife.
Solution
As per the given problem A husband was prosecuted B wife for Adultery with C. During trail
B denies that C is A’ Wife. But the court convict’s B. Afterwards ‘C’ was prosecuted for
bigamy in marrying B during A’s life time. ‘C’ says that she never was ‘A’s wife. It is very clear
that in second prosecution C was admitted that she was never A’s wife.
Hence, as per the provisions of Section 43 of the Indian Evidence Act the judgment by
convicting B is irrelevant.
10. In a civil suit instituted by the plaintiff against the Defendant for recovery
of debt amount under a promissory note, the plaintiff produced in the court a
Xerox copy of the promissory Note in support of his claim. Is the Xerox copy
admissible? Refer to the provisions of the Evidence Act.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
In a civil suit instituted by the plaintiff against the Defendant for recovery of debt amount
under a promissory note, the plaintiff produced in the court a Xerox copy of the promissory
Note in support of his claim.
Solution
As per sub-section 2 of the section 63 of Indian Evidence Act, copies made from the original
by mechanical processes which in themselves insure the accuracy of the copy, and copies
compared with such copies are admissible as secondary evidence. Hence the xerox copy of
the promissory Note in support of his claim is admissible as secondary evidence.
5
11. In a case of gang rape, the prosecutrix sates in her evidence before the
court that she did not consent for the sexual intercourse by the accused. What
type of presumption can be drawn by the court in such a situation? What is the
effect of drawing a presumption in this context? Refer to relevant provision and
case law.
In a case of custodial rape, where sexual intercourse by the accused is proved,
the prosecutrix stated in the court that she had not consented to sexual act.
What type of presumption can be raised by the court in this regard? What is the
effect of such a presumption? (Similar question Aug/Sept 2014)
Ans:
Facts of the Case
In a case of gang rape, the prosecutrix sates in her evidence before the court that she did
not consent for the sexual intercourse by the accused.
Solution
As per the provisions of Section 114 A of the Indian Evidence Act read with the provisions of
section of Sub section 2 of Section 376 of IPC, “where sexual intercourse by the accused is
proved and the question is whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have
been raped and such woman states in her evidence before the court that she did not consent,
the court shall presume that she did not consent and raped by the accused”.
September 2018
12. ‘A’ intentionally and falsely leads B to believe that land belongs to ‘A, and
thereby induces B to buy and pay for it. The land afterwards becomes the
property of ‘A, and ‘A’ seeks to set aside the sale on the ground that, at the
time of the sale, he had no title. Decide.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘A’ intentionally and falsely leads B to believe that land belongs to ‘A, and thereby induces B
to buy and pay for it. The land afterwards becomes the property of ‘A, and ‘A’ seeks to set
aside the sale on the ground that, at the time of the sale, he had no title.
Solution
The Section 115 of the Indian Evidence Act defines Estoppel as “When one person has, by his
declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a
thing to be true and to act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed,
in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representative, to deny the
truth of that thing”.
6
Hence, A is estopped for seta-siding the sale transaction as contemplated in Section 115 of
the Indian Evidence Act.
13. ‘A’ accused of murder, alleges that, by reason of unsoundness of mind, he
did not know the nature of the act. Decide. (Sept 2017)
Ans:
Facts of the Case
A’ accused of murder, alleges that, by reason of unsoundness of mind, he did not know the
nature of the act.
Solution
As per the provisions of section 105 of the Indian Evidence Act, Burden of proving that case
of accused comes within any of the General Exceptions in the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860),
or within any special exception or proviso contained in any other part of the same Code.
Accordingly, the burden of proof lies on A.
September 2017
14. ‘A’ an accused person admitted that he along with ‘B’. the fellow accused
committed Robbery. What is the admissible value of confession made by one
accused person against the co-accused person?
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘A’ an accused person admitted that he along with ‘B’. the fellow accused committed Robbery.
Solution
Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act provides that “when more persons than one are being
tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting
himself and some other of such persons is proved, the Court may take into consideration such
confession as against such other person as well as against the person who makes such
confession.
Accordingly, confession made by one accused person against the co-accused person admissible
under Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act
15. ‘A’ owns a piece of land over which ‘B’ has no right but ‘B’ builds on its ‘A’
keeps quiet and after the building is completed sues for its demolition. Discuss
whether ‘A’ can be estopped from asserting his rights.
X owns a piece of land over which Y has no right. But Y builds a house on it. X
keeps quiet and after the building is completed sues for its demolition. Discuss
whether X can be estopped from asserting his right. (Similar Question Aug/Sept
2015)
7
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘A’ owns a piece of land over which ‘B’ has no right but ‘B’ builds on its ‘A’ keeps quiet and
after the building is completed sues for its demolition.
Solution
In this instant case A has a piece of land over which ‘B’ has no right but ‘B’ builds on its ‘A’
keeps quiet and after the building is completed sues for its demolition. It means with the
knowledge of A only B has builds house in A’s Property and A neither he/she challenges it nor
does refute it within a reasonable period of time. Hence, A is Estopped from challenging it or
making any counterclaim in the future as contemplated in Section 115 of the Indian Evidence
Act. The other party is said to have accepted the claim though reluctantly, that is, he/she
has acquiesced it.
16. Soon after commission of theft, stolen goods are found in possession of ‘X’.
What type of presumption can be raised by the court in the trail of ‘X’? Refer to
relevant provisions of the Indian Evidence Act.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
Soon after commission of theft, stolen goods are found in possession of ‘X’.
Solution
Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act states that “the Court may presume the existence of
any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of
natural events, human conduct and public and private business, in their relation to the facts
of the particular case.
Accordingly, the court may presume that X has committed an offence of theft as such soon
after theft, stolen goods are found in possession of X as contemplated in section 114 of the
said Act.
September 2016
17. A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. A said before the court
that B and I murdered C. Can the court consider this confession against B?
‘X’ and ‘Y’ are jointly tried for the murder of ‘Z’. ‘X’ Made a statement that “I
myself and Y murdered ‘A’. The prosecution intends to use this statement against
Y. Is it relevant? Discuss. (Similar question Aug/Sep 2015)
Ans:
Facts of the Case
A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. A said before the court that B and I murdered
C.
8
Solution
Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act provides that “when more persons than one are being
tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting
himself and some other of such persons is proved, the Court may take into consideration such
confession as against such other person as well as against the person who makes such
confession.
Accordingly, confession made by A accused person against the B co-accused person admissible
under Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act.
18. To prove that A murdered Y, ‘C’ a child of 5years was brought in as an
eye witness. Is it relevant?
Ans:
Facts of the Case
To prove that A murdered Y, ‘C’ a child of 5years was brought in as an eye witness.
Solution
Indian jurisprudence has accepted child witnesses as a part of the legal system. The Supreme
Court has, on occasion affirmed that the test of competence if satisfied by a child even as
young as 5 years old, would allow him to be a witness.
Under Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, there is no minimum age for a witness.
Children as young as three years old have been witnessed before trial courts in cases of sexual
abuse.
Hence, C child witness is relevant under Section 118 of the Indian Evidence Act, against A,
who can understand the questions put to him and rationally answer them.
19. A gives B a receipt for money paid by B, oral evidence is offered for the
payment. Is it admissible?
Ans:
Facts of the Case
A gives B a receipt for money paid by B, oral evidence is offered for the payment.
Solution
Section 59 of the Indian Evidence Act contemplates that “all facts, except the contents of
documents or electronic records, may be proved by oral evidence.
In this instant case A gives B a receipt of money paid by B, hence the documentary evidence
of receipt is essential as documentary evidence.
20. ‘X’ in order to prove his nativity, brings a Photostat copy of the certificate
issued by the Revenue Officer. Can it be relied upon?
9
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘X’ in order to prove his nativity, brings a Photostat copy of the certificate issued by the
Revenue Officer.
Solution
As per sub-section 2 of the section 63 of Indian Evidence Act, copies made from the original
by mechanical processes which in themselves insure the accuracy of the copy, and copies
compared with such copies are admissible as secondary evidence. Hence the photostat copy
of the certificate issued by the Revenue Officer in support of his claim is admissible as
secondary evidence.
May/June 2016
21. ‘A’ was tried for murder of ‘B’ through poison. Two days prior to the murder
of ‘B’, ‘A’ went to a drug shop and obtained a particular poison. Is it a relevant
fact? Give Reasons.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘A’ was tried for murder of ‘B’ through poison. Two days prior to the murder of ‘B’, ‘A’ went to
a drug shop and obtained a particular poison.
Solution
Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act contemplates that “any fact is relevant which shows or
constitutes a motive or preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact.”
In this instant case A is having motive of murder of B, and purchasing a particular poison two
days prior to the murder from a drug shop is preparation. Hence, the motive and preparation
of A for murder is fact in issue or relevant fact.
22. ‘A’ was charged with shooting ‘B’ with intent to kill him. The prosecution
has produced evidence showing that ‘A’ has on earlier shot at ‘B’. Is this fact
admissible as evidence?
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘A’ was charged with shooting ‘B’ with intent to kill him. The prosecution has produced evidence
showing that ‘A’ has on earlier shot at ‘B’.
Solution
10
Section 14 of the Indian Evidence Act provides that a fact relevant as showing the existence
of a relevant state of mind must show that the state of mind exists, not generally, but in
reference to the particular matter in question.
In this instant case the prosecution has produced evidence showing that ‘A’ has on earlier
shot at ‘B’ and hence admissible as contemplated in Section 14 of the Indian Evidence Act.
23. ‘A’ and ‘B’ are assaulted by ‘C’. ‘A’ shortly before his death makes a
statement that ‘C’ attacked ‘B’ and stabbed him and ‘B’ died. Is it admissible as
dying declaration? Discuss.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘A’ and ‘B’ are assaulted by ‘C’. ‘A’ shortly before his death makes a statement that ‘C’ attacked
‘B’ and stabbed him and ‘B’ died.
Solution
Sub-Section (1) of Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act provides that “When the statement
is made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as to any of the circumstances of the
transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that person’s death
comes into question. Such statements are relevant whether the person who made them was
or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, and whatever may
be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question.”
In this instant case A’ and ‘B’ are assaulted by ‘C’. ‘A’ shortly before his death makes a
statement that ‘C’ attacked ‘B’ and stabbed him and ‘B’ died. Hence, the statement made by
A shortly before his death is admissible as dying declaration as contemplated in Sub-Section
(1) of Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act
24. ‘A’ a client says to ‘B’ a lawyer: “I have committed forgery, and I wish
that you should defend me.” Is it a privileged communication? Discuss whether the
lawyer can be compelled to disclose it?
Ans:
Facts of the Case
A’ a client says to ‘B’ a lawyer: “I have committed forgery, and I wish that you should defend
me.”
Solution
As per section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act legal counsel/advocate shall at any time be
permitted, unless with his client’s express consent, to disclose any communication made to him
in the course and for the purpose of his employment, provided that nothing in the said section
shall protect from disclosure any such communication made in furtherance of any illegal
purpose.
11
In this instant case after commission of an offence, the A offender approached B an advocate
for defense and told him how he committed the offence, which act is unlawful and hence is
not a privileged communication. During trail the advocate can disclose it to the court as
contemplated in section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act.
August/September 2015
25. In a civil suit, the plaintiff produced a Xerox Copy of the original sale
deed as evidence. Is it admissible? If so, when?
Ans:
Facts of the Case
In a civil suit, the plaintiff produced a Xerox Copy of the original sale deed as evidence.
Solution
As per sub-section 2 of the section 63 of the Indian Evidence Act, copies made from the
original by mechanical processes which in themselves insures(certifies) the accuracy of the
copy, and copies compared with such copies are admissible as secondary evidence. Hence the
xerox copy of the original sale deed in support of his claim is admissible as secondary evidence
at admission stage, but at the stage of trial the plaintiff needs to file either the original sale
deed or certified copy of the Sale deed for best evidence.
August / September 2014
26. In a case between ‘X’ and ‘Y’ the court having jurisdiction over insolvency
proceedings adjudged ‘Y’ as an insolvent. ‘Z’ another creditor of ‘Y’ filed a suit
against ‘Y’ for recovery of the loan amount. Is the judgement pf the court that
‘Y’ is an adjudged insolvent binding on ‘Z’? Discuss.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
In a case between ‘X’ and ‘Y’ the court having jurisdiction over insolvency proceedings
adjudged ‘Y’ as an insolvent. ‘Z’ another creditor of ‘Y’ filed a suit against ‘Y’ for recovery
of the loan amount.
Solution
As per Section 41 of the Indian Evidence Act, A final judgment, order or decree of a
competent Court, in the exercise of probate, matrimonial admiralty or insolvency
jurisdiction which confers upon or takes away from any person any legal character, or
which declares any person to be entitled to any such character, or to be entitled to any
specific thing, not as against any specified person but absolutely, is relevant when the
existence of any such legal character, or the title of any such person to any such thing, is
relevant.
12
In this instant case insolvency proceedings adjudged ‘Y’ as an insolvent in a case related
between ‘X’ and ‘Y’. ‘Z’ another creditor of ‘Y’ filed a suit against ‘Y’ for recovery of the
loan amount. Hence, the earlier insolvency proceedings adjudged ‘Y’ as an insolvent in a
case related between ‘X’ and ‘Y’ relevant in fresh case filed by Z as contemplated in Section
41 of the Indian Evidence Act.
27. After commission of an offence, the husband informed his wife as to the
circumstances in which he has committed it. In the trail, the prosecution wants
to produce the wife of accused as a witness to disclose what has been
communicated to her by her husband. Is it permissible? Discuss.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
After commission of an offence, the husband informed his wife as to the circumstances
in which he has committed it. In the trail, the prosecution wants to produce the wife of
accused as a witness to disclose what has been communicated to her by her husband.
Solution
Privileged communication is a kind of information which cannot be admitted in a court of
law as evidence due to the nature of the relationship the two persons involved in the
communication share. There are three types of privileged communications, namely, spousal
privilege, attorney-client privilege and state privilege. The given question relates spousal
privileged communication which is protected under section 122 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Hence, the prosecution has no right to produce the wife of accused as a witness to disclose
what has been communicated to her by her husband as contemplated in Section 122 of the
Indian Evidence Act.
August / September 2013
28. Judicial Magistrate was unavailable, doctor recorded dying declaration,
whether fitness certificate is necessary for validity of Dying Declaration to sustain
conviction.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
Judicial Magistrate was unavailable, doctor recorded dying declaration.
Solution
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
13
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. It was held in the case of N. Ram v. State WRIT - C No. - 40772 of 1993
(Allahabad) that the medical opinion cannot wipe out the direct testimony of an eye witness
which states that the deceased was in a fit mental condition and able to make a dying
declaration.
Hence, fitness certificate is necessary for validity of Dying Declaration to sustain conviction.
29. X’ police officer at the scene of offence prepared a sketch map relying on
the statements made by witnesses. Whether it is admissible or not.
Ans:
Facts of the Case
X’ police officer at the scene of offence prepared a sketch map relying on the statements
made by witnesses.
Solution
A rough sketch map prepared by the sub-Inspector of Police on the basis of a statement made
to him by eye-witnesses during the course of investigation showing the place where the
deceased was hit by the assailant was held to be admissible under Section 162 of Cr. P.C. as
it is deemed to be a statement made to the police during the process of investigation.
30. ‘X’ is the land owner of suit property, alleged Y defendant encroached upon
his land. Who has to prove the land in question belongs to them?
Ans:
Facts of the Case
‘X’ is the land owner of suit property, alleged Y defendant encroached upon his land.
Solution
Section 110 of the Indian Evidence Act provides that “when the question is whether any
person is owner of anything of which he is shown to be in possession, the burden of proving
that he is not the owner is on the person who affirms that he is not the owner.”
Hence, burden of proof lies on X to prove the land in question belongs to him.
14
