2.
IT Parade
The IT Parade in the context of the Indian Evidence Act refers to the inclusion of electronic records as
admissible evidence under Section 65B. This provision ensures that digital evidence, such as emails,
text messages, or data from electronic devices, is valid in legal proceedings if it meets certain criteria
for authenticity and certification.
3. Official communication & Privileged communication
Official Communication (Indian Evidence Act):
Under Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act, official communication refers to unpublished official
records relating to the affairs of the state. Such records cannot be disclosed in court unless the head
of the department, with the permission of the government, considers it appropriate. This provision is
designed to protect sensitive state information.
Privileged Communication (Indian Evidence Act):
Privileged communication, under Sections 122-129, refers to specific communications that are
protected from disclosure in court. Examples include:
• Section 122: Communication between spouses during marriage cannot be disclosed without
consent.
• Section 126: Professional communication between a lawyer and their client is protected.
These provisions aim to safeguard confidential relationships and encourage honest
communication.
6. Refreshing Memory
Under Section 159 of the Indian Evidence Act, a witness is allowed to refresh their memory while
giving testimony in court. They may refer to:
1. Written documents: These must have been made or verified by the witness at a time when
the events were fresh in their memory.
2. Notes or records: If made by another person, the witness must have verified them when the
facts were still recent.
Additionally, under Section 160, the adverse party has the right to inspect such documents and cross-
examine the witness based on them. This provision ensures accuracy and credibility in the witness's
testimony.
7. Leading Questions. Sec 146
Leading Questions (Indian Evidence Act):
• Definition: A leading question is one that suggests the answer or assumes facts not yet
established. For example: "You were at the scene of the crime, weren't you?"
• Applicability:
o Under Section 141, leading questions are generally allowed during cross-examination
but are restricted during examination-in-chief unless the court permits them.
o Section 143 clarifies that leading questions can be asked in cross-examination as a
matter of right.
Section 146: Questions to Test Veracity
Section 146 permits certain types of questions during cross-examination to:
1. Test the credibility of the witness.
2. Discover the witness's position in life.
3. Uncover the truthfulness of facts stated in their testimony, including questions that may be
uncomfortable or embarrassing, provided they are relevant to the case.
These provisions aim to ensure that the evidence presented is both reliable and truthful.
8. Hearsay Evidence
Definition: Hearsay evidence refers to evidence that a witness does not personally know but has
heard from someone else. It is generally inadmissible in court because it is considered unreliable and
lacks direct knowledge.
Key Provisions:
1. General Rule (Section 60): Oral evidence must be direct. A witness must testify to facts that
they have personally seen, heard, or perceived.
2. Exceptions to Hearsay Rule: Certain situations allow hearsay evidence to be admissible:
o Dying declaration (Section 32): Statements made by a person on their deathbed
about the cause of their death are admissible.
o Admissions and confessions (Sections 17–31): Certain admissions or confessions
may be considered even if not made directly in court.
o Statements in public documents (Section 35): Entries in official records can be
admitted as evidence.
Purpose: These rules ensure that evidence presented in court is reliable, relevant, and firsthand, with
limited exceptions where the evidence carries inherent credibility.
9. Accomplice evidence.
Definition: An accomplice is a person who has participated in the commission of a crime but testifies
against their co-accused in a trial. Their evidence is considered under specific conditions due to their
involvement in the offense.
Key Provisions:
1. Admissibility:
o Section 133 states that the testimony of an accomplice is admissible, even without
corroboration.
o However, it is a rule of prudence, not law, to seek corroboration before acting on
such evidence, as accomplices may have motives to lie.
2. Corroboration (Illustration under Section 114):
o The court generally treats accomplice evidence with caution and looks for
independent corroboration to support their testimony.
o Illustration (b) of Section 114 allows the court to presume that an accomplice is
untrustworthy unless their evidence is supported by other reliable evidence.
3. Pardon to Accomplice (Section 306):
o An accomplice may be granted a pardon if they agree to testify fully and truthfully
for the prosecution. If they fail to comply, they can be tried for the original offense.
Purpose:
While accomplice evidence can be valuable in uncovering the truth, the safeguards of corroboration
ensure that the testimony is credible and not influenced by personal interest or coercion.
10. Evidentiary value of lunatic witness
Definition: A lunatic witness is a person with a mental disorder or unsound mind who may be called
upon to give evidence. The admissibility and evidentiary value of their testimony depend on their
ability to understand and provide rational testimony at the time of examination.
Key Provisions:
1. Section 118:
o A person is not disqualified as a witness merely due to unsoundness of mind.
o The court assesses whether the witness is capable of understanding the questions
and giving rational answers. If they can comprehend and respond accurately, their
evidence is admissible.
2. Assessment by the Court:
o The judge evaluates the mental state of the witness at the time of examination. If
the lunatic is lucid and coherent during their testimony, the evidence is considered
valid.
o If the testimony is given during a phase of insanity or incoherence, it may be
inadmissible or carry little weight.
3. Corroboration:
o Testimony from a lunatic witness is often treated with caution and may require
corroboration from other reliable evidence to be considered credible.
Evidentiary Value:
The testimony of a lunatic witness, if given during a lucid interval and found credible, has the same
evidentiary value as that of a sound-minded individual. However, courts are cautious and ensure
such evidence is corroborated to avoid errors in judgment.
11. Evidence for fact
Definition: Evidence for fact refers to the presentation of material or testimony in court to prove or
disprove the existence of a fact in issue or a relevant fact. The Indian Evidence Act defines how facts
can be established through evidence.
Key Provisions:
1. Fact in Issue (Section 3):
o A "fact in issue" refers to any fact that is directly in question during a legal
proceeding. Evidence is used to establish or negate these facts.
2. Types of Evidence:
o Oral Evidence (Section 59): Statements made by witnesses about what they have
seen, heard, or perceived.
o Documentary Evidence (Section 61): Documents produced in court to establish a
fact.
3. Relevance of Facts (Sections 5–55):
o Only relevant facts that are connected to the facts in issue can be admitted as
evidence. These include facts that explain, corroborate, or contradict the main facts
in question.
4. Direct and Circumstantial Evidence:
o Direct evidence directly proves the fact in issue without needing inference.
o Circumstantial evidence indirectly proves a fact through a series of related facts or
circumstances.
Purpose:
The Indian Evidence Act ensures that evidence presented in court is relevant, admissible, and
capable of proving or disproving facts in issue or related facts, thereby aiding the court in reaching a
fair and just decision.
