Role of Evidence
The object of rules of evidence is to help the courts ascertain the truth and to avoid the confusion
in the minds of judges that may result from the admission of evidence in excess. Hales v. Kerr,
(1908) 2 KB 601 Thus, the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, was passed with the main object of
preventing indiscipline in the admission of evidence by enacting a correct and uniform rule of
practice. The law of evidence is the lex fori which governs the courts: whether a writer is
competent or not; whether a certain fact requires to be proved by writing or not; whether certain
evidence proves a fact or not; that is to be determined by the law of the country where the
question arises, where the remedy is sought to be enforced and where the Court sits to enforce it.
The decisive element in a case that leads to the accused’s conviction or acquittal in compliance
with the law is evidence under the Evidence Act. Evidence is typically presented to support or
refute a fact in question; however, each fact has a certain amount of evidentiary value, which
directly influences the evidence’s relevance, admissibility, and reliability.
According to the Evidence Act, an admission is the voluntarily acknowledged existence or
veracity of a particular fact. They include any oral, written, or electronic statements that suggest
something about a relevant fact or a fact under dispute3..
Applicability of the Act to Judicial and Arbitral Proceedings
Under this Act, “Judicial Proceeding” is defined. Justice Spankie, however, held in the R v.
Gholam case that any procedure in which evidence is or may be gathered, or in which a verdict,
punishment, or final order is rendered based on documented evidence, qualifies as a court
proceeding. In order for the adjudicator or magistrate to preside as a judge in a court of law, the
Court must fulfill managerial or executive obligations in addition to legal obligations.
The Act expressly states that it has no impact on the arbitral procedure. As a consequence, unless
the basic principles of justice and well-established principles of evidence are ignored, the judge
is not bound by specialised standards of evidence.
It was thus decided that the Act’s regulations do not apply to proceedings before an arbitrator in
the case of Halalal v. State Industrial Court. By bringing a dispute before an arbitrator, one hopes
to settle it swiftly and avoid getting mired in the time-consuming and intricate procedures of a
traditional trial or in procedural details.
Evidence that is used to demonstrate a fact.
Digital/Electronic Evidence: Evidence that is stored in digital or electronic form.
Forensic Evidence: Evidence that is obtained through scientific methods.
Physical Evidence: Evidence that is tangible and can be seen or touched.
Statistical Evidence: Evidence that is based on statistical data.
Conclusion
Every piece of evidence, regardless of its type—testimonial, ocular, or documentary—is a crucial
instrument for successfully establishing the case. Evidence is crucial in all legal proceedings,
whether they are civil or criminal, as the absence of it will make it impossible to prove the
existence of the facts. Furthermore, the kinds of evidence matter in terms of their admissibility
and relevancy standards. Moreover, no watertight spaces exist where types of evidence can be
placed. Based on multiple criteria, the evidence has been divided into distinct classes to make
studying and comprehending the material easier. Certain evidence-related principles, such as the
hearsay evidence principle, are significant and generally applicable unless there is a compelling
reason why they might be considered an exception. Furthermore, in keeping with the evolution
of legislation, the Evidence Act has expanded its purview to include digital and electronic
evidence, which is crucial given the pervasiveness of the digital world in our daily lives.
