UNIT -1

1. Explain the rules relating to relevancy of admission. (10)

2. Explain the relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction with cases. (10) x3 Section-4
3. Explain the relevancy of Facts showing motive preparation and conduct. (10) Section -6
4. Explain the meaning and types of evidence. Principles regarding reception of circumstantial
evidence. (10) x2
5. Explain the relevancy of facts showing occasion, cause or effects. (10) section-5

6.

FACTS NECESSARY TO EXPLAIN OR INTRODUCE FACT IN ISSUE OR RELEVANT FACT (section -7),
Illustration c.

7.
8. ‘A’ is accused of killing his friend ‘B’. Prosecution has adduced evidence to the effect that ‘A’ owed
a huge amount of loan to ‘B’. Is this evidence relevant. (6)
9. ‘A’ is accused of committing a crime at Belagavi on 02-02-2022 at 11 AM. But ‘A’ was not there
Belagavi on the said date as he went to participate in a reality show at Bengaluru. Can he prove it?
(6) YES UNDER SECTION 19 (EXCEPTION TO ADMISSION)
10. ‘A’ is tried for the murder of ‘B’ by poison. Before the death of B, A procured poison similar to that
which was administered to B. Explain the relevancy of this fact. (Section 6(1) Any fact which
constitutes motive and preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact is relevant)
11. ‘A’ has filed a suit against ‘B’ for the recovery of loan. ‘B’ denies the loan. ‘A’ wants to prove his
statement made to ‘C’ wherein he stated that he lent loan to ‘B’. Can he do so?
12. Explain test identification parade. (6) (Section-7)
13. Note on plea of alibi. (6)

UNIT-2
1. Define confession. Explain the rules relating to relevancy of confession. Discuss the law relating to
confession (10) Define confession and distinguish it from admissions. (10) Explain the evidentiary
value of confession of co-accused. (10) X4
2. What is dying declaration? Under what conditions do they become relevant? (10)
3. Explain the matters upon which expert opinion may become relevant. (10) X3
4. Explain the general principles regarding relevancy of judgements. (10) x3
5.

6.
7. ‘A’ sues ‘B’ for Rs. 1000 and shows entries in his account books showing ‘B’ to be indebted to him to
this amount. Are these entries sufficient and relevant to prove debt? (6)
8. A is accused of killing B by beating with a club. Eyewitnesses testified to one blow upon the head of
B but medical evidence has recorded four external injuries on his head. Which version is reliable by
court. (6)
9. ‘A’ married women has committed suicide, after sending an e-mail to her father. The said e-mail
revealed that she was subjected cruelty by her husband. Examine the relevancy of e-mail. (6)
10. ‘A’ is accused of theft. ‘A’ has confessed before that police and has shown the place stolen goods
were kept. Police have recovered the goods. Examine the evidentiary value of his statement to
Police. (6)

UNIT-3
1. Explain the relevancy of character of evidence in civil and criminal cases. (10) x2
2. Explain the facts of which court must take judicial notice. (10)
3. Explain the rule that oral evidence must in all cases be direct. State exceptions. (10) Difference
between oral and documentary evidence with case laws. Explain. (10) What is primary and
secondary evidence? When secondary evidence becomes admissible? (10) (6) X4
4. What is secondary evidence? Explain the rules regarding the proof of attested documents. (10)
5. Explain the provisions relating to proof of handwriting and signatures. (10)
6. A want to prove a will. But both attesting witnesses to that will are dead. Advise him. (6)
7. A wants to produce documents which is destroyed by fire. Can he produce the photocopy of that
document to prove it? (6)
8. Write a note on Public documents. (6)
9. ‘A’ agrees in writing to pay Rs. 1,000 to ‘B’ on 01-03-2022. At the same time an oral agreement was
made to the effect that the amount shall not be paid till 31-03-2022. Can this oral agreement be
proved? (6)
10. A agrees to sell his horse to ‘B’ for Rs. 1,000 or 1,500. Can evidence be given to show the exact price
that should be paid?
11. Write a note on proof of electronic records. (6)
12. Write a note on Hearsay Evidence. (6)
 UNIT-1

Explain the meaning and types of evidence. Principles regarding reception of

circumstantial evidence. (10)
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam has main two aspects:

1) Taking of evidence (Admissibility of evidence)

Relevancy Admissibility

Determines if a fact is logically connected to the issue Determines if a relevant fact can be legally accepted
in court

Based on Sections 4-50 Based on all provisions, including exclusionary rules

Broader concept Narrower concept  only relevant + legally acceptable facts are admissible

2) Evaluation of the evidence (Proof and Presumption)

Section-2(1) (e) “evidence” means and includes,

• Oral Evidence: All statements, including statements given electronically, made by witnesses in court,
permitted or required by the court (because they are allowed only when they are admissible)

• Documentary Evidence: All documents, including electronic records, produced for inspection of the
court.

This definition of evidence is defective and incomplete. It excludes;

1) The statements and admissions of the parties, their conduct and demeanor before the court,
2) The definition includes statements of witnesses, but not the witnesses themselves, (their
conduct and demeanor)
3) Material or real evidence like physical objects, such as weapons, bloodstains etc.
4) Circumstantial Evidence, circumstances coming under the direct cognizance of the court, facts
of which, the court can take judicial notice of and the fact which the court must and may presume.

So, evidence is the admissible material (More than just Oral or documentary) presented before the
court to prove, disprove or presume a fact in issue or relevant fact (Evaluation of the Evidence)

LIMITATIONS

1) FIR not a substantive piece of evidence (Can corroborate the evidence of the person lodging the
same)
2) Judge’s Personal knowledge and observation is No Evidence
3) Motive not a substantial Evidence (Intention can be)

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE
 1) ORAL and DOCUMENTARY

Oral means Testamentary Evidence. Statements made by a witness before a court in relation to matter of
fact under Inquiry.

Documentary: Means any matter expressed or described upon any substance, paper, stone or anything
by means of letter or marks. When a document is produced in a case in support of the case, the
document becomes documentary evidence. Electronic Records produced for inspection are included in
the document and therefore they are also documentary evidence.

2) PRIMARY(Original) and SECONDARY (Un-Original)

PRIMARY EVIDENCE: The original document itself, L bases his claim on a sale-deed. The sale- deed is a
original evidence.

SECONDARY EVIDENCE: Unoriginal evidence is that which derives its force from other. In the above
example if instead of original sale deed a copy is produced, it would be unoriginal evidence of the dead.

3) DIRECT and INDIRECT (CIRCUMSTANTIAL)

Direct Evidence (Positive Evidence) : Evidence about the real point in controversy. For example, A is
tried for setting fire to the house. B deposes that he saw A setting fire to the house, is direct and positive
evidence, as the witnesses are deposing exactly to the precise point in issue.

Indirect (Circumstantial Evidence): Relates to a series of other facts than the fact in issue. But by
experience have been found so associated with the fact in issue in relation to cause and effect.

FIVE GOLDEN PRINCIPLES OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

In SHARAD BIRDICHAND SARDA V. STATE OF MAHARASTRA the supreme court described five golden
principles laid down in HANUMANT V. STATE of M.P.

1. The circumstances from which the conclusion is to be drawn should be fully established

Court indicated that the circumstances concerned ‘must or should’ and not ‘maybe’ established. It is a
primary principle that the accused must be and not merely may be guilty.

2. Complete Chain of Circumstances

chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with
the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability that act must have been done
by the accused.

3. Consistency with Hypothesis of Guilt

Each circumstance of facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of
the accused, they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty.

4. Elimination of Innocence (only one hypothesis)

The facts should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one sought to be proved.
 5. Should be of a conclusive nature and tendency

means that the circumstances must firmly and inevitably lead to the conclusion of guilt, with no room
for reasonable doubt or alternative possibilities.

ADDITIONAL

6. Motive

While not always necessary, a clear motive strengthens the reliability of circumstantial evidence.

4) REAL and PERSONAL

REAL EVIDENCE Physical objects like weapons, fingerprints, etc. produced in court.

PERSONAL EVIDENCE Which is afforded by human agency. A is charged with the murder of B. Witnesses
come and dispose before the court to the effect that they saw A killing B. Here the evidence reaches the
court through human agency.

5) JUDICIAL and NON-JUDICIAL EVIDENCE

JUDICIAL Evidence received by the court in a legal proceeding.

NoN- Judicial Evidence Statements made outside the court but later proved in court.

6) SUBSTANTIVE AND NON-SUBSTANTIVE

SUBSTANTIVE: on which reliance can be placed for the decision of the case

NON-SUBSTANTIVE: that which either corroborates the substantive evidence to increase its credibility, or
which contradicts A substantive evidence to discredit it.

Explain the relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction with cases. (10)
Only a fact in issue and relevant facts are admissible in court – Section 3 of the Bharatiya Sakshya
Adhiniyam 2023.

Let’s understand what does FACT, FACT IN ISSUE AND RELEVANT FACT Mean.
Fact is defined in Section 2 (f) whereas Fact in Issue is defined in Section 2(g) and relevant is defined in
Section 2(k).

2(f) Fact means: Physical Facts and Psychological Facts

1) Any Thing, state of things, or relation of things, capable of being perceived by the senses (Easier to
proof)
2) Mental condition of which any person is conscious. (Can be proved by circumstantial evidence) Priya
Darshini case (Convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence)
For e.g. a person who saw something or holds a certain opinion is a fact.
“Fact Basically means something that exists can be true or not be true.”

2(g) Fact in Issue: 1) Existence and Non-Existence or Nature and Extent of any;
2) Right, Liability or disability can be;
3) Asserted or Denied in any suit or proceedings.

2(k) Relevancy: A fact is said to be relevant to another when it is connected to another as per the
provisions under this Adhiniyam.

Relevant facts are listed in the act as Legal Relevancy or Logical Relevancy, and only legal relevancy is
recorded and not logical relevancy.

Part II, CHAPTER II

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 talks about the facts which are relevant as per 2(k) of the acts.
(Section 3- Section 50)

Section-3: Evidence may be given, for

1. fact in issue or the

2. ones declared relevant hereinafter,
3. not for the ones he is disentitled to prove by any provision of any law in force (Limitations Act).
List of Relevancy is provided from section-4 to Section-50.

In this question we will deal with Section 4 first in the list of relevancy.

Section 4: relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction

Facts which are not in issue, but are connected with the fact in issue or a relevant fact as form of the
same transaction are relevant, whether they occurred

1) at the same time and place or (he fact must form part of a continuous series of events.)

-Hearing the sound of a bullet

-Statement or cry of an injured person

-Cry of the witness who see the murder happening

-Gestures of the dying person

2) at different times and places (Time and location are not the deciding factors; what matters is the
proximity and continuity)

ILLUSTRATION: He is accused of waging war against Government of India by taking part in an armed
insurrection in which property is destroyed, Cops are attacked, and jails are broken open. The occurrence
of these facts is relevant, as forming part of general transaction, though A may not have been present at
all of them.

Limitations:

• Must have proximity in time, place, or continuity of action.

• Cannot be remote or unrelated.

• Hearsay not allowed, unless it falls under res gestae.

 RES GESTAE = THE THINGS DONE

HERASAY EVIDENCE IS NOT ACCEPTED AS AN EVIDENCE -> EXCEPTION -> RES GESTAE

(Section 4 deals with res gestae in general terms whereas section 5-14 deals with res gestae in specific
terms.)

Statements made naturally, spontaneously or without any deliberation during the course of an event,
carry high grade of credibility and thus the court believes them to be true.

IILUSTRATION:

- A husband of B was beating B outside their home and while wife cried saying, " don't kill me”. Z,Y,X
saw and heard what a was doing and what B said. B was found dead inside the home. Whatever
was said or done by A or B or X, Y, Z (By-standers) at the beating, or so shortly before or after it as
to form part of the transaction is a relevant fact.

Landmark case law- Aveson v. Lord Kinnaird

R. V Bedingfield, 1879

facts of the case:

A women with cut throat came suddenly out of a room in which she has been injured shortly before she
died she told her aunt “look what bedingfield has done to me”.

Held:

whether this statement be considered as res-gestae? No, it was held not to be a res-gestae, because the
statement was not said spontaneously at the time when the throat was being slit. And there was time
taken by her to come from the bedroom to the hall so it was not spontaneous thus not res- gestae, not
immediate. There was a criticism in this case and it was said that the doctrine is interpretated very
narrow and there is scope for wide interpretation.

Ratten v. Queen 1971

Facts of the case:

A man was prosecuted for murdering his wife. His defense was that the short was by accident. The fact in
issue is whether the murder was accidental. Evidence was that the deceased before she died telephoned
the emergency landline, she told “get me the police please” and the call suddenly ended.

Then after the police came to the address and found her dead can the evidence be considered as Res-
Gestae.

HELD: Yes it was held and considered as res-gestae. Statements immediately after events are coming
under the scope of res gestae.

R V. CHRISTIE

Facts of the case: There was an assault against a young boy. Shortly after the incident the boy made a
certain statement to the mother. Whether the statement made by the boy is relevant as res-gestae.
No considering res-gestae was not done. The boys statement was not spontaneous and the incident and
the statement were not connected, and they were separated from time and circumstance thus it is not
res-Gestae.

R. V Foster

Facts of the Case: charged with manslaughter while driving. A vehicle was seen by the witness, which
was driven at a very fast speed. The accident was not seen.

But immediately after the accident, he talked to the deceased before death. He told this car has
committed my death.

This statement was considered as Res-Gestae.

Explain the relevancy of facts showing occasion, cause or effects. (10)

-Only a fact in issue and relevant facts are admissible in court – Section 3 of the Bharatiya Sakshya
Adhiniyam 2023.

Let’s understand what does FACT, FACT IN ISSUE AND RELEVANT FACT mean.
Fact is defined in Section 2 (f) whereas Fact in Issue is defined in Section 2(g) and relevant is defined in
Section 2(k).

2(f) Fact means: Physical Facts and Psychological Facts

1) Any Thing, state of things, or relation of things, capable of being perceived by the senses (Easier to
proof)
2) Mental condition of which any person is conscious. (Can be proved by circumstantial evidence) Priya
Darshini case (Convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence)
For e.g. a person who saw something or holds a certain opinion is a fact.
“Fact Basically means something that exists can be true or not be true.”

2(g) Fact in Issue: 1) Existence and Non-Existence or Nature and Extent of any;
2) Right, Liability or disability can be;
3) Asserted or Denied in any suit or proceedings.

2(k) Relevancy: A fact is said to be relevant to another when it is connected to another as per the
provisions under this Adhiniyam.

Relevant facts are listed in the act as Legal Relevancy or Logical Relevancy, and only legal relevancy is
recorded and not logical relevancy.

Part II, CHAEPTER II

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 talks about the facts which are relevant as per 2(k) of the acts.
(Section 3- Section 50)

Section-3: Evidence may be given, for

1. fact in issue or the

2. ones declared relevant hereinafter,
 3. not for the ones he is disentitled to prove by any provision of any law in force (Limitations Act).
List of Relevancy is provided from section-4 to Section-50.

In this question we will particularly deal with section-5: relevancy of facts showing occasion, cause
or effects of facts in issue or relevant facts.

Facts which ARE OCCASION, CAUSE OR EFFECT, ------ immediate or otherwise ----or --- which constitute
the state of things which afforded an opportunity for occurrence----- of ---facts in issue and relevant
facts are ----- are relevant.

1. Occasion:

• Occasion refers to the circumstances or situation that led to or provided the setting for the
happening of a fact in issue or relevant fact.
• It is not the direct cause but the context that allowed the event to take place.

2. Cause:

• The cause is the direct reason or motive behind the happening of a fact in issue or relevant fact.

3. Effect:

• The effect refers to the consequence or result of a fact in issue or relevant fact.
• It helps establish a connection between the event and what followed it.

Illustration

a) Question whether a robbed b. The fact that before robbery, b went to a fair with money in his
possession, and showed it or mentioned it, to a third party, forms occasion for its occurrence.
b) A murdered B? Marks on ground will constitute as effect of the fact in issue, thus relevant.
c) Weather A poisoned B? The state of B’s health before the symptoms ascribed to poison, and
habits of B, known to A, which afforded an opportunity for the administration of poison relevant.
(Cause)

R V Richardson is a case of murder and how section 5 was interpreted. A minor girl was retarded, and
when she was alone at a cottage, Richard the accused use to rape her, and when she got pregnant, he
killed her.

Occasion: She was alone at home; Parents were working and thus left the girl alone at home.
Effect: Impression of footprints of the accused because of rain in the mud. Thus, the effect was
considered relevant.

Explain the relevancy of facts showing Motive, Preparation and Conduct.

OR
‘A’ is tried for the murder of ‘B’ by poison. Before the death of B, A procured
poison similar to that which was administered to B. Explain the relevancy
of this fact. (Section 6(1) Any fact which constitutes motive and
preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact is relevant)
‘A’ is accused of killing his friend ‘B’. Prosecution has adduced evidence to
the effect that ‘A’ owed a huge amount of loan to ‘B’. Is this evidence
relevant. (6)
-Only a fact in issue and relevant facts are admissible in court – Section 3 of the Bharatiya Sakshya
Adhiniyam 2023.

Let’s understand what does FACT, FACT IN ISSUE AND RELEVANT FACT mean.
Fact is defined in Section 2 (f) whereas Fact in Issue is defined in Section 2(g) and relevant is defined in
Section 2(k).

2(f) Fact means: Physical Facts and Psychological Facts

1) Any Thing, state of things, or relation of things, capable of being perceived by the senses (Easier to
proof)
2) Mental condition of which any person is conscious. (Can be proved by circumstantial evidence) Priya
Darshini case (Convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence)
For e.g. a person who saw something or holds a certain opinion is a fact.
“Fact Basically means something that exists can be true or not be true.”

2(g) Fact in Issue: 1) Existence and Non-Existence or Nature and Extent of any;
2) Right, Liability or disability can be;
3) Asserted or Denied in any suit or proceedings.

2(k) Relevancy: A fact is said to be relevant to another when it is connected to another as per the
provisions under this Adhiniyam.

Relevant facts are listed in the act as Legal Relevancy or Logical Relevancy, and only legal relevancy is
recorded and not logical relevancy.

Part II, CHAEPTER II

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 talks about the facts which are relevant as per 2(k) of the acts.
(Section 3- Section 50)

Section-3: Evidence may be given, for

1. fact in issue or the

2. ones declared relevant hereinafter,
3. not for the ones he is disentitled to prove by any provision of any law in force (Limitations Act).
List of Relevancy is provided from section-4 to Section-50.

In this question we will particularly deal with section-6: Motive, Preparation and previous and
subsequent conduct.
Section 6(1) Any fact which constitutes motive and preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact is
relevant.

Motive:

For constituting crime two essential elements are required Actus reus and Mens Rea, which also the
Wrongful Act and the Intention to commit the Wrongful Act.

As described by J. Hastings, ‘Intention is the aim, then motive is the spring’. Motives are the ulterior
objective towards committing crime.

For example, Intention can be to kill someone, and motive can arise from jealousy or an argument.
Intention should always be evil, but motive is not always evil.

When there is direct evidence present, the prosecution is not required to establish motive. Motive is an
essential factor in the case where the whole case is based on circumstantial evidence, thus, required to
secure conviction.

Illustrations: a) of Section 6 of BSA, 2023 are examples of motive:

A) A is tried for the murder of B. A had murdered C, B knew it, and B tried to blackmail A, is relevant
and constitutes motive.

Tara Devi v. State of UP (1991): SC held that previous threats, previous altercations, or previous
litigations between parties are admitted shows motive. The mere existence of motive is by itself not an
incriminating circumstance.

KM NANAVATI V. State of Maharashtra case

PREPARATION

Steps taken before doing an act, planning to do an act. (e.g., buying poison, drafting a will). S.C in Malkiat
Singh v. State of Punjab. Preparation implies the measures or action that are taken for the commission
of any offence.

STAGES OF CRIME

1st – Intention
2nd – Preparation
3rd – Attempt
4th – commission

Is mere preparation punishable

Generally, Preparation alone is not punishable, however there are certain cases where mere preparation
to commit the crime is per se an offence and is thus punishable.

S-152 of the BNS Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita - Preparation for waging war against the GOI is punishable with
either death, life imprisonment or fine. (Attempts, plans or abets)

Illustration:
A is tried for murder by poison. A bought similar poison before the death. Is relevant as preparation:
Acquiring poison shows preparatory conduct.

CONDUCT

Section 6 (2) the conduct of

- Any Party,
- Agent,
- or the person against whom an offence is committed, (Victim)

Is relevant If it is:

- In reference to Fact In issue or Relevant Fact,

- or it must influence Fact in Issue or Relevant Fact.

It applies whether the conduct is “Previous or Subsequent” to the act in question.

Explanation 1 – Conduct does not include statement is the general rule, but it has two exceptions, it is
Included only when it explains or accompanies (Together with conduct) conduct.

Statement might be relevant under other sections of this Adhiniyam (15-33) but not under section -6.

Explanation 2 – When the conduct is relevant, any statement made to him or in his presence, which
affects the conduct is relevant.

But a witness’s conduct is not relevant.

ILLUSTRATIONS

A) A is accused of robbing B. Someone says, “Police are coming to arrest the person who robbed B”,
and A runs away, is relevant and shows subsequent conduct.
B) The question is whether A owes B ₹10,000. In A’s presence, someone says A owes B, and A says
nothing. A’s silence when accused in his presence is relevant — conduct that might imply
admission and shows previous conduct.

R.M.Malkani v. State of Maharasthra (1973): Conversation over telephone for settling details for passing
bribes- money was recorded by secret instruments, was held to be evidence of conduct.

He is accused of a crime prosecution has shown that the he absconded

from his house immediately after the incident can a proof that he had an
urgent work?
Section -7 Facts necessary

1) to explain or
 2) introduce fact in issue or relevant fact.
3) They support or deny inferences (guesses)
4) they help to identify a person or thing
5) they help to fix the time and place of an incident
6) or show the relation between people involved

Illustration C: A is accused of a crime. The fact that, soon after the Commission of a crime, A absconded
from his house, is relevant under section 6, As conduct subsequent to the fact in issue. The fact that at
the time when he left home, A had sudden and urgent business at the place to which he went is relevant
as tending to explain that he left home suddenly. The details of the business on which he left are not
relevant except in so far as they are necessary to show that business was sudden and urgent.

Explain the rules relating to relevancy of admission. (10)

‘A’ has filed a suit against ‘B’ for the recovery of loan. ‘B’ denies the loan. ‘A’
wants to prove his statement made to ‘C’ wherein he stated that he lent
loan to ‘B’. Can he do so?
An admission is usually a statement or conduct which is adverse to the interest of the maker in respect of
a fact in issue. An admission is always accepted and used against its maker.

BISWANANTH PRASAD V. DWARKA PRASAD- Admission is a substantive evidence.

AJODHYA PRASAD BHARGAVA V. BHAWANI SHANKER BHARGAVA AND Anr. Admissions and
confessions are pieces of evidence of a serious self damaging type. They cannot be extracted from the
words of the party in ambiguous form or from language of doubtful import.

BASANT SINGH V. JANKI SINGH AND ORS an admission cannot be divided into parts and can only be
examined as a whole.

N MURALI KRISHNA V. SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY (IMPORTANT) Admission has to be made by an

adversary and not the one who asserts

Section 15 of BSA: An admission is a statement,

1) oral or documentary or;
2) or contained in electronic form
3) Which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact,

• Only statements related to the case or facts in issue are admissible (Section 3).

• Irrelevant or collateral statements are not admissible.

4)Made by people under the circumstances, hereinunder mentioned.

WHO CAN MAKE AN ADMISSION

(UNDER SECTION -16)

o A party to the proceeding,

o Agent to any such party,

Whom the court regards, under these circumstances of the case, as expressly or impliedly authorized
by him to make admissions.

o Their Representatives (While the party making them hold that character)

o Party interested in Subject-Matter persons who have any proprietary or pecuniary interest in the
subject matter of the proceedings.

o Persons from whom the party derives title or interest

(UNDER SECTION 17)

o Persons whose liability or position is in issue (like partners or agents),

ILLUSTRATION

- A undertakes to collect rents for B

- B sues A for not collecting rent due from C to B
- A denies that rent was due from C to B
- statement by C that he owed B rent is an admission and is a relevant fact as against A, if A denies
that C did owe rent to B

(UNDER SECTION -18)

o Persons expressly referred to by the party. Statements made by a person expressly referred to by a
party as someone authorized to speak on their behalf are relevant as admissions.

The question is whether a horse sold by A to B is sound.

A says to B, go and ask C, she knows all about it. Seize statement is an admission.

PROOF OF ADMISSION

THE GENERAL RULE OF EVIDENCE IS THAT admissions are relevant only against the person who
makes them.

(UNDER SECTION -19)

Admissions against the person making them: Are relevant and may be proved as against the person
who makes them.

Except in following cases, Even if it's not against them it may be proved;
 1) When it is of such a nature that, if the person making it were dead, it would be relevant as
between third persons under section 26.
26(1) When it relates to the cause of death
26(2) Made in course of business
2) When it consists of statement of existence of any state of mind or body, made at or about the
time when such state of mind or body existed, and is accompanied by conduct (SUBSEQUENT
CONDUCT) rendering its falsehood improbable.

The person talks about their own mental or physical state, The statement is made at or around the
time that mental/physical condition actually, there is some conduct or surrounding circumstances
that make it unlikely the statement is false existed.

3) It’s an admission is relevant otherwise than an admission.

ILLUSTRATIONS

1) The question between A&B is, whether a certain deed is or not forged. A affirms that it is for
genuine and B says it is forged. Now in this case a may prove a statement that bee said it was
genuine, and B may prove a statement that a set the deed was forged.
2) A the captain of a ship is tried for casting her away, A produces a book kept by him in ordinary
course of business showing observation alleged to have been taken by him from day-to-day
Indicating that the ship was not taken out of her proper course. A may prove these
statements because they would be admissible between third parties if he were dead under
section 26(2).
3) A is accused of a crime committed by him at Calcutta. He produces a letter written by him
and date at Lahore on that day, and bearing the Lahore postmark of that day. The statement
in the date of the letter is admissible, because, if a were dead it would be admissible under
section 26(2).
4) A is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. He offers to prove that he
refused to sell them below their value. A may prove the statements though they are not
admissions because they are explanatory of conduct influenced by fact and issue.

ADMISSION IN CIVIL CASES WHEN RELEVANT

- Made in compromise negotiations (Statements made with the intent of settlement are
inadmissible to encourage honest negotiation.)
- Made conditionally or without prejudice (If made upon an express condition that evidence of it
shall not be given)

‘A’ has filed a suit against ‘B’ for the recovery of loan. ‘B’ denies the loan. ‘A’ wants to prove his
statement made to ‘C’ wherein he stated that he lent loan to ‘B’. Can he do so?

Facts: - A filed a suit against B for loan recovery. - B denies the loan. - A wants to use a statement made to
C as evidence.

Issue: - Is A’s statement to C about lending the loan admissible as evidence?

Law: - Section 19 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, states that admissions are relevant and may be
proved as against a person who makes them. - However, Section 26 may be considered if the statement
was made by a deceased person.

Analysis: - If A’s statement to C is treated as an admission, it may be relevant. However, the statement
alone may not be sufficient unless it is corroborated by other evidence. - If C is alive, he can be called as
a witness to testify about the statement.

Conclusion: - The statement may be relevant as an admission but must be corroborated with additional
evidence to be conclusive.

A is accused of killing B, prosecution has adduced evidence of marks on

ground produced due by fight between A and B, prior to the incident. Is it
relevant?
According to Section 2(k) and Section-3:
Evidence may be given, for

1. fact in issue or the

2. ones declared relevant hereinafter,
3. not for the ones he is disentitled to prove by any provision of any law in force (Limitations Act).
List of Relevancy is provided from section-4 to Section-50.

Section 5 declares it relevant to give evidence in following cases:

Facts which ARE OCCASION, CAUSE OR EFFECT, ------ immediate or otherwise ------ of facts in issue and
relevant facts are ------- relevant.

Illustration c

d) Question whether a robbed b. The fact that before robbery, b went to a fair with money in his
possession, and showed it or mentioned it, to a third party, forms occasion for its occurrence.
e) A murdered B? Marks on ground will constitute as effect of the fact in issue, thus relevant.

R V Richardson is a case of murder and how section 5 was interpreted. A minor girl was retarded, and
when she was alone at a cottage, Richard the accused use to rape her, and when she got pregnant, he
killed her.

Occasion: She was alone at home; Parents were working and thus left the girl alone at home.
Effect: Impression of footprints of the accused because of rain in the mud. Thus, the effect was
considered relevant.

Explain test identification parade.

It is a process that is mostly used in criminal cases to identify the accused before the court. The role of
the witness Is very important in the test identification parade because it is the responsibility of the
witness to identify the accused through the parade.
The idea of this process is to check whether witnesses can identify the accused among the various
individuals. This will establish the originality of the witness and identifying an unknown person related to
the context of the offence.

Section -7 Facts necessary

7) to explain or
8) introduce fact in issue or relevant fact.
9) They support or deny inferences (guesses)
10) they help to identify a person or thing
11) they help to fix the time and place of an incident
12) or show the relation between people involved

Section 54 of BNSS if a person is arrested for an offence and identification by others is needed for
investigation, the court can order the arrested person to go and identification process on the police
officer's request.

In a criminal trial identifying the correct accused is crucial. A test identification parade is a process
conducted during investigation where the witness identifies the accused from a group of people. It helps
the pullers to know whether they are investigating the right people.

PURPOSE

Assure witness: helps the witness confirm if the person arrested is the same Seen at the crime scene

Assist police proceeding correctly

Aids prosecution: strengthens their case of the prosecution

NOTE : test identification. Is a corroborative evidence and not a substantive evidence.

Note on plea of alibi.

The term alibi originates from Latin term meaning elsewhere or somewhere else.

The defence of plea of Alibi is employed by an accused individual to refute their alleged involvement in a
crime.

Section-9 when facts not otherwise relevant become relevant.

13) If they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact
14) they make existence or nonexistence of any fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or
improbable

plea of alibi is a part of section 9.

SECTION-106 the burden of proof as to any particular fact. If an accused want to plea alibi the burden of
proof lies on the accused itself.

MUKESH V STATE OF N.C.T OF DELHI AIR 2017 - In this case the accused claimed that he was attending
a musical program with his family at the park at the time of the incident.
However the court rejected the plea of alibi considering the contradictory evidence such as dying
declaration of the victim's, DNA analysis and fingerprint analysis.\

DUDH NATH PANDEY V. STATE OF U.P

The Supreme Court said that the plea of alibi must be proved with absolute certainty so as to make the
presence of accused at the crime scene impossible.

‘A’ is accused of committing a crime at Belagavi on 02-02-2022 at 11 AM. But ‘A’

was not there Belagavi on the said date as he went to participate in a reality
show at Bengaluru. Can he prove it? (6) YES UNDER SECTION 19 (EXCEPTION
TO ADMISSION)
Section-9 when facts not otherwise relevant become relevant.

1) If they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact

2) they make existence or nonexistence of any fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or
improbable

plea of alibi is a part of section 9.

And also Under Section-19 of the BSA which says

(UNDER SECTION -19)

Admissions against the person making them: Are relevant and may be proved as against the person
who makes them.

Except in following cases, Even if it's not against them it may be proved;

4) When it is of such a nature that, if the person making it were dead, it would be relevant as
between third persons under section 26.
26(1) When it relates to the cause of death
26(2) Made in course of business
5) When it consists of statement of existence of any state of mind or body, made at or about the
time when such state of mind or body existed, and is accompanied by conduct (SUBSEQUENT
CONDUCT) rendering its falsehood improbable.

The person talks about their own mental or physical state, The statement is made at or around the
time that mental/physical condition actually, there is some conduct or surrounding circumstances
that make it unlikely the statement is false existed.

6) It’s an admission is relevant otherwise than an admission.

ILLUSTRATIONS

5) The question between A&B is, whether a certain deed is or not forged. A affirms that it is for
genuine and B says it is forged. Now in this case a may prove a statement that bee said it was
genuine, and B may prove a statement that a set the deed was forged.
 6) A the captain of a ship is tried for casting her away, A produces a book kept by him in ordinary
course of business showing observation alleged to have been taken by him from day-to-day
Indicating that the ship was not taken out of her proper course. A may prove these
statements because they would be admissible between third parties if he were dead under
section 26(2).
7) A is accused of a crime committed by him at Calcutta. He produces a letter written by him
and date at Lahore on that day, and bearing the Lahore postmark of that day. The statement
in the date of the letter is admissible, because, if a were dead it would be admissible under
section 26(2).

UNIT-2

Define confession. Explain the rules relating to relevancy of confession.

Discuss the law relating to confession (10)
"All confessions are admissions, but all admissions are not confessions"

In the law of evidence, admissions and confessions are often used by parties against themselves. While
they are closely related, the two are not synonymous. A confession is a subspecies of admission and
relates specifically to criminal liability, whereas an admission can arise in both civil and criminal
contexts. A confession is a specific type of admission in criminal law where the accused admits guilt
either wholly or substantially.

Example:

• Saying “I killed him” → Confession

• Saying “I had a fight with him before he died” → Admission, not confession

While confession is not explicitly defined, it is treated under provisions 22 to 25 dealing with
confessional statements in criminal cases.

A confession would be relevant if it is made

- in a fit state of mind

- and is voluntary. Where or not it was voluntary depends on:

When confession is not relevant

Section-22: A confession shall be irrelevant in a criminal proceeding if in the opinion of the court:

- The confession has been obtained by any inducement, threat or promise,

- Should be regarding the charge against the person
- Should be from a person in authority
- Sufficient to give the accused person grounds for supposing that, he would gain any advantage or avoid
any evil in reference to proceedings against him.

SECTION – 23 Confession to police officer

No confession to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence, unless it is
made in the immediate presence of a magistrate.

This rule is in place to protect against potential coercion, duress or abuse that an accused person mighface when
dealing with law enforcement.
Where the statement is made as a result of harassment and continuous interrogation for several hours after the
person is treated as an offender and accused, such statement must be regarded as involuntary.
Case Law:- State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad- the Supreme Court of India examined the admissibility of
a confession obtained by the police. The court held that a confession made to the police is inadmissible and
explained that confessions made to the police are more likely to be tainted by fear or intimidation
HOW MUCH INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM ACCUSED MAY BE PROVED
It states that if a statement leads to discovering a fact related to the crime, it becomes admissible as
evidence, even if it was obtained through coercion.
SECTION – 24 Evidentiary Value of Confession of Co Accused- Section 24

o Section 24 of IEA clarifies that the confession of one accused is not considered substantive evidence
against a co-accused.
o This means that a co-accused cannot be convicted solely based on the confession of another accused.
o The confession of a co-accused can, however, be used to corroborate other evidence presented in the case.
o It can assist the court in determining the truthfulness of other evidence and in reaching a conclusion
regarding the guilt of the accused. However, the conviction must ultimately be based on the strength of
the other evidence presented and the confession of a co-accused can only be used to support that
conclusion.

Illustration:- A is on his trial for the murder of C. There is evidence to show that C was murdered by A and
B, and that B said ––“A and I murdered C”. This statement may not be taken into consideration by the
Court against A, as B is not being jointly tried.

Case Law:-

o Pancho v. State of Haryana (2011), the Supreme Court of India emphasized that the confession of a co-
accused is not a substantive piece of evidence. It can only be used to corroborate other evidence and cannot
be the sole basis for conviction. The court must carefully analyze all the evidence presented in the case to
determine the guilt of the accused.
Kinds of Confession:-

1) Judcial Confession (In front of Magistrate or the Court)

2) Extra Judicial Confession (Elsewhere then in front of the Magistrate or Court)
Generally those made by a party to or before a private individual which includes even a judicial officer in his
private capacity.
- Case Law:- Sahoo v State of UP, the accused was heard confessing to the murder of his own daughter
while speaking to himself. This was deemed a relevant confession that could be admitted as evidence.
Basis Admission Confession

A statement that suggests an

A direct acknowledgment of guilt in a criminal
inference about a fact in issue or
Definition offence; a subset of admissions. Not formally
relevant fact. (Section 15, BSA
defined in BSA but governed by Sections 22–25.
2023)

Broader term – applies to both civil

Nature Narrower – applies only to criminal cases.
and criminal cases.

Not conclusive but can be used as

If voluntary and valid, can form the basis of
Legal Effect substantive evidence against the
conviction.
maker.

Can be partial or qualified – doesn't Must relate to the commission of an offence

Scope
have to admit guilt. and involve full or substantial admission of guilt.

Any party to civil/criminal

Made by proceeding or their authorized Only by accused in a criminal case.
agents (Sec. 16, BSA).

Governed by Sections 15–21, BSA

Relevancy Governed by Sections 22–25, BSA 2023.
2023.

Voluntariness not essential, but Must be voluntary, else inadmissible (Section

Voluntariness
affects weight of evidence. 22).

Use against Co- Only relevant if jointly made or Not substantive evidence against co-accused
accused adopted. unless tried jointly (Section 24).

“I lent money to B.” → Admission “I stabbed him to death.” → Confession

Example
(civil). (criminal).

What is dying declaration? Under what conditions do they become

relevant?
A dying declaration is called as “Leterm Mortem” which means words said before death. The concept of DD is
based upon the Latin principal which states that “a man will not meet his maker with a lie in his mouth.”
The concept of DD is given under Section 26 of BSA: A 'Dying declaration' means the statement (WRITTEN
OR VERBAL) of a person who has died explaining the
- cause of his death as to
- any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death.
Queen-Empress v. Abdulla (1885), the Allahabad High Court held that if the injured person is unable to speak,
he can make dying declaration by signs and gestures in response to the question.
The essential conditions for the applicability of dying declaration
1) To whom the statement is to be made and its form:- A statement of dying declaration could be made to any
person - a doctor, a Magistrate, a friend or near relative, a police officer. However, a statement recorded by a
Magistrate or doctor is considered more reliable, and that recorded by a police officer or close relative not (require
more scrutiny).

Harbans Lal v. State of Haryana:- In this case DD was recorded duly recorded by the doctor in presence of
two other doctors stating that she was burnt by her mother-in-law and husband for failure to bring dowry. The
accused was convicted on the dying declaration recorded by doctor.

(2) The person making the statement must have died:- The death need not occur immediately after the making
of the statement (as discussed above). However, the death must occur. If the persons making the declaration
chances to live, his statement is inadmissible as a 'dying declaration'.

(3) Statement must relate to the cause of his death or the circumstances of the transaction which resulted
in his death:- Own

4) The cause of death must be in question: - .In Dannu Singh v. Emperor, - A and five other persons were
charged with having committed a dacoity in a village. A, who was seriously wounded while being arrested, made
before his death a dying declaration as to how the dacoity was committed and who had taken part in it. It was
held that declaration was not admissible in evidence against other persons, as it does not relate to his death, but
relates to participation of his associates in the dacoity.

5) The statement must be complete and consistent:-

• If the deceased fails to complete the main sentence (as for instance, the genesis or the motive for the
crime), a dying declaration would be unreliable. However, if the deceased has narrated the full story, but
fails to answer the last question as to what more he wanted to say, the declaration can be relied upon.
• A dying declaration ought not to be rejected because it does not contain details or suffers from minor
inconsistencies.
• Case Law:- Surajdeo Oza v. State of Bihar,- Where the bride recorded two declarations, one to a police
officer and other to a Magistrate, they being similar in material factors, evidence accepted though minor
discrepancies
(6) Declarant must be competent as a witness:- It is necessary for the relevancy of a dying declaration that
the declarant, if he had lived on, would have been competent witness.

Case Law :- R. v. Pike, (1829)- In in a prosecution for the murder of a child, aged four years, it was proposed to
put in evidence, as a dying declaration, what the child said shortly before her death. The declaration was held to
be inadmissible.

Explain the general principles regarding relevancy of judgements. (10)

Judgment meaning, it as a decision which is given by the judges in a court regarding the rights, duties and
liabilities of an individual.
The relevancy of judgments under the Evidence Act means to how and when a judgment from a previous case
can be used in subsequent (present) legal proceedings.
Sec 34 to 38 Judgements of Court of Justice When Relevant.

SECTION 34 Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial (Res Judicata)

The existence of any judgement, order or decree by which the law prevents any court from taking cognizance of
a suit or holding trial, is a relevant fact.

Illustration:- ‘ A’ and ‘B’ are two parties, ‘A’ sues ‘B’ for matters related to property. But the court dismissed
the suit and then again ‘A’ filed a suit against ‘B’. So it was said that once the judgement was given by a court
over a particular subject matter then that court does not have the jurisdiction and the formulae of res judicata
applies
Under this section prior judgments, orders, or decrees will be relevant if such matter is already decided by the
court between the same dispute parties.

SECTION 35 “Relevancy of Certain Judgments in Probate, Matrimonial, Admiralty or Insolvency

Jurisdiction”:

This section declares that final judgments, orders, or decrees of courts exercising special jurisdictions—namely:
• Probate (wills, succession),

• Matrimonial (marriage, divorce),

• Admiralty (maritime claims),

• Insolvency (bankruptcy),

shall be relevant when:

• The legality of a person’s status, or

• The legal character of a person (e.g., whether someone is married, divorced, bankrupt, etc.), or

• The title to property is in question.

This section consists of two parts:
1) It deals with judgement in rem
These are judgments that determine the status or condition of a person or thing and are binding on the world.
Example: A decree of divorce, a grant of probate, a declaration of bankruptcy. Binding on all, not just the
parties to the case.

2) A judgement in personam
Not binding on others, only relevant between those parties. A decree declaring that A must pay B for breach of
contract is not binding on anyone else except A and B.

NOTE : Conclusive Proof:

• Cannot be contradicted by evidence or reopened by another court.

• Helps avoid re-litigation of matters like:
 o Whether someone is bankrupt

o Whether a will is valid (probate granted)

o Whether a marriage has been dissolved

SECTION – 36 Relevancy and effect Judgement other than those mentioned in Section 35.
If it has any of the two essential characteristics :-
➢ Judgements are relevant if they are related to matters of public nature(Public right), or
➢ Judgment is relevant in the present inquiry of the subject matter in the present case.
NOTE: It is important to note that judgments under this section is not conclusive proof unlike section 41.
However, it can be admissible in the court of law.
ILLUSTRATION: A sues B for trespass on his land. B alleges the existence of a public right of way over the land
which A denies. The existence of a degree in favor of the defendant, in a suit by A against C for a trespass on the
same land, in which C alleges the existence of the same right of way, is relevant, but not a conclusive proof that
the right of way exists.
SECTION – 37 Judgment other than those mentioned in Section 34, 35, 36, when relevant

Judgments other than mentioned in these sections are irrelevant unless the existence of such judgment, order or
degree is a fact in issue or is relevant under some other provision of this Adhiniyam.

ILLUSTRATION A has obtained a degree for the possession of land against B. C, B’s son, murders A in
consequence. The existence of the judgement is relevant, as showing motive for a crime.

SECTION-38 Fraud, Collusion, or Incompetent Court in obtaining judgment, or incompetence of Court,

may be proved.

Allows any party to a case to challenge the validity of a judgment, order, or decree presented by the opposite
party if:

The court that passed the judgment had no authority (jurisdiction) to do so, or
The judgment was obtained through fraud or collusion (secret agreement between parties to deceive).

It protects the justice system from being misused. Just because a judgment exists doesn’t mean it is automatically
true or valid. If it was wrongfully passed, it should not be accepted.

Question Explain the provision in relation to expert Evidence ?

Expert Opinion- Section 39(1)

• An ‘expert’ is an individual with special knowledge, skill, or experience in any of the following areas:
foreign law, science, art, handwriting, or finger impression is called expert.
• The Expert opinion is not binding on the court. The court will only accept the opinion, if the opinion is
accordance with law and trustworthy.
Section 39(2) – Opinion of Examiner of electronic evidence
 • Under this admissibility of the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence under Section 79 of IT
Act, 2000, in cases related to electronic data transmission and storage. This opinion is treated as that of an
expert witness.

Illustration:- if a person has died because of poison, whether or not his death was caused by said poison can be
ascertained by an expert’s opinion.

Meaning of the term “Expert”

The meaning of the term expert can be understood by two case laws:-

a) Bal Krishna Das Agrawal vs. Radha Devi & Oths.-

• An expert is an individual who by his training and experience has acquired the ability to give an
opinion which the ordinary witness does not process.
• The Evidence of an expert is such evidence which is based on expertise and experience.
b) Abdul Rahman vs. State of Mysore-
The Question in this case was put on the opinion of professional goldsmith for checking the purity of gold in a
particular dispute. The expert doesn’t have a formal qualification, but his opinion was still taking as evidence
because he has a past experience.

OTHER PROVISIONS RELEVANT

➔ Facts bearing upon opinions of experts Section (40)

Section 40- Facts Bearing on Opinion of Experts

Section 40 supplements Section 39. It says that relevance of facts that may be considered irrelevant in a case but
become relevant if they support or contrast with an expert’s opinion.
➔ Section 41: Opinion as to Handwriting, when Relevant
The opinion of experts regarding handwriting. When the court needs to determine the authorship of a document,
the opinions of handwriting experts are considered admissible. Court has to form an opinion as to the originality
of any document signed or written.

Section 41(2) A: Option to digital signature when relevant When the court has to form an opinion as to
originality of an electronic signature, the opinion of the certifying Authority which has issued the electronic
Signature is a relevant fact.
➔ Section 42: Opinion as to Existence of Right or Custom, when Relevant
In matters involving points of law or custom, Section 42 allows the court to consider the opinions of individuals
who are especially skilled in these areas, a person who would be likely to know of its existence if it existed, is
relevant.

➔ Section 43: Opinion as to Usages, Tenets, Etc., when Relevant

Section 43 extends the principle of expert opinion to usages and tenets of any body of men or family. When the
court needs to understand the practices or beliefs of a particular group, the opinions of individuals with special
knowledge in these areas are considered relevant. For example: The constitution and governance of any religious
or charitable foundations.
 ➔ Section 44: Opinions of Relationship when Relevant
When the court needs to ascertain the relationship between individuals, the opinions of such as family members,
are considered relevant. However, this provision is subject to certain limitations. For Example: A question
whether A is married to B

➔ Section 45: Grounds of Opinion When Relevant

Finally, Section 45 specifies that the grounds on which an expert opinion is based are also relevant. This ensures
that the court considers not only the opinion itself but also the reasoning behind it.

Admissibility of Expert Opinion

The court before the admissibility of the expert opinion check two things:-

1) Whether the subject matter of such a nature which require a necessary expert opinion.
2) The Court will ensure that person is really an expert or not.
UNIT-3

Explain the relevancy of character of evidence in civil and criminal cases.

(10)
Introduction

• A character is an aggregate of various traits or qualities which a person has in himself/herself.

• Section 46-50:
• 46 and 50 - Relevancy of Character in Civil
• 47,48,49- Relevancy of Character in Criminal Cases
Meaning
• The Cambridge dictionary defines character as a particular combination of qualities that make a person
different from others. Honesty, good-natured, modest, violent temper, etc. are all traits of character.
• Section 55 of the Indian Evidence Act clarifies that ‘character’ includes both reputation and disposition:
➢ Reputation: The general opinion about an individual held by others.
➢ Disposition: The inherent qualities or nature of an individual.
Relevancy of Character in Civil

1) Section 46: In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed, irrelevant (General Rule of
Irrelevance)
states that in civil cases, the character of a person, whether good or bad is generally irrelevant under
evidence Law in Civil cases. The reasoning behind this is that decisions should be based on factual
evidence rather than subjective judgments about character.
Illustration
Consider a case where ‘A,’ a businessman, is accused of fraud. Under Section 52, evidence suggesting
that ‘A’ is an honest person or has a history of deceit is irrelevant. The focus remains on the factual
evidence related to the fraud allegation.

Exceptions to Relevance of Character under Section 46

 - As far as the character appears from the facts otherwise relevant.
- Section 50: Character as Affecting Damages
> It states that when the cause of action is proved in favour of plaintiff, now the damage is to be paid
to the plaintiff, in such case the court will consider the character of the plaintiff relevant to ascertain
the damages.
> In a case of seduction or defamation, the character of the plaintiff may influence the damages
awarded.
> Case Law;- Bharpur Singh v. Parshotam Dass (2015): The Supreme Court held that evidence
of character in civil cases is generally irrelevant unless it is directly in issue or affects damages.

Relevance of Character in Criminal Cases

1) SECTION 47: Good Character of the Accused: - Relevant. The rationale is that a person of good
character is less likely to commit a crime, and this can influence the presumption of innocence.

Sardar Sardul Singh Caveeshar v. State of Maharashtra (1963) Empire Conspiracy Case, the court talked
about how character evidence is used in criminal trials. It explained that while having a good character can help
the accused in uncertain cases, it cannot replace strong evidence proving guilt.

2) SECTION 49: Bad Character of the Accused: - generally irrelevant. The following three are
exception:-

➢ Rebuttal of Good Character Evidence: If the accused presents evidence of good character, the
prosecution can rebut it with evidence of bad character.
➢ Bad Character as a Fact in Issue: Such as in cases of habitual offenders.
➢ previous conviction is relevant as evidence of bad character
Previous bad characters of the person is irrelevant until and unless good character is pleaded: the previous
bad character is not relevant except in reply, unless evidence has been given of good character in which case it
becomes relevant.

3) SECTION 48: Evidence of character or previous sexual experience not relevant in certain cases.

64-78 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or for attempt to commit such offence, where the question of consent is
in issue, the character of the victim is irrelevant.

Introduced by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013,

STATE OF JHARKHAND V. SHAILENDRA KUMAR RAI SC AIR 2022 : whether a woman is habitual to
sexual intercourse is irrelevant, two finger test or per veginum examination cannot be adopted.

Difference between oral and documentary evidence with case laws, and
even answer to primary and secondary evidence. Explain.
Section-2(1) (e) “evidence” means and includes,

• Oral Evidence: All statements, including statements given electronically, made by witnesses in court,
permitted or required by the court (because they are allowed only when they are admissible)

• Documentary Evidence: All documents, including electronic records, produced for inspection of the
court.
 Oral evidence, in general, refers to evidence provided orally by witnesses. A witness who cannot speak can still
communicate the facts to the court via writing or gestures, and it’s considered oral evidence.

Case Law:- Queen-Empress vs Abdullah, a woman’s throat was cut, making her unable to speak. However, she
gave the name of the attacker by using hand gestures, and this was considered to be oral evidence that was relevant
to a dying declaration.

Rule With Regards to Oral Evidence

➢ SECTION 54: All facts except the contents of a document can be proved orally.

➢ As section 55 of the Evidence Act provides, the oral evidence must be direct in all cases. This means that
the witness can only present the facts of which he has firsthand knowledge.

➢ Section 55 provides the four major principles for oral evidence.

1. If the fact in issue could be seen, the evidence must be presented by such witnesses who have seen the
crime or issue themselves. Illustration: A has seen B entering C’s house and coming out, committing
theft. Here, no person other than A can give oral evidence.
2. If the fact in issue could be heard, the evidence must be presented by witnesses who have listened to it.
Illustration: A has heard the sound of a quarrel in his neighbour B’s house, and in the evening, B’s wife
C has been admitted to hospital with several injuries. Here, the evidence given by A will only be
admissible as oral evidence.

3. If the fact in issue can be perceived in any other sense, the evidence can only be given by witnesses
who have perceived it. Illustration: A finds the behaviour of B very odd around C, who is B’s friend,
and later C is found dead. Only the evidence given by A will be admissible as oral evidence.
4. If the fact in issue depends on the opinion, it must be presented by witnesses who have that opinion.
Illustration: If A thinks B is responsible for the theft committed in C’s house, only A’s personal opinion
will be admissible as oral evidence.

Hearsay Evidence
It is considered second-hand information. It is not direct evidence. The hearsay evidence is not admissible in a
court of law.
Why Hearsay is Not Allowed
Hearsay is generally inadmissible because the original speaker is not present in court to take an oath or be cross-
examined, making the statement unreliable. There's also a high risk of misinterpretation, lack of firsthand
knowledge, and potential for fabrication, which weakens the quality of justice.
Exceptions

Admission of Statement: Since the statement is made by the party against their own interest, it's presumed to be
true and reliable. Hence, it becomes admissible even if it's hearsay.

Res Gestae (Section-4), Very immediately related, Because these statements are made spontaneously during or
immediately after the event, with no time for fabrication.
Dying Declaration Based on the belief that a person on their deathbed will not lie, and because they won't be
alive to testify.
Confessions If voluntarily made, a confession is highly reliable and can be used as evidence against the person
who made it—even if it's made outside court.

RULE WITH REGARDS TO DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

SECTION 56- the contents of an document can be proved by primary or secondary evidence.

1) PRIMARY EVIDENCE
2) SECONDARY EVIDENCE

PRIMARY EVIDENCE

Section 57: Primely evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the court.

SECTION 59: If primary evidence is available, it would exclude secondary evidence.

SECONDARY EVIDENCE

Section 58 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam Defines what secondary evidence means and includes.

Secondary evidence includes-

a) Certified copies: Copies of the original document that are certified by the appropriate authority as
true and accurate reproductions. The date of the copy, the name and official title of the officer who has
subscribed to such copy, and the seal of the officer must also be affixed on that copy.
b) Copies made by mechanical processes: Copies produced through mechanical means, such as
photocopies, electronic scans, or similar processes that inherently ensure the accuracy of the copy.
Copies that are compared with such mechanically produced copies are also considered secondary
evidence.
c) Copies made from or compared with the original: Copies of the document made by hand or other
means, which may include handwritten copies or copies compared to the original document.
d) Counterparts of documents: Copies or duplicates of the original document which are not signed or
executed by the parties, for them the copies became the SE
e) Oral accounts: Testimony or statements given by individuals who have personally seen the contents
of the original document.

• Case Law:- Kalyan Singh v. Smt. Chhoti and Ors:- It was observed that the genuineness of certified
copies that are in Section 63(1) is presumed under Section 78 of the Evidence Act.
• Case Law:- Surinder Kaur v. Mehal Singh (2013):- When a photostat copy is presented as evidence, it
is on the party producing it to prove that the original document existed and is lost or is in possession of
the opposite party who failed to produce it. Mere assertion is not sufficient to prove it.
Circumstances in which secondary evidence is admissible in place of primary evidence- Section 60

a) Original is in the possession of Adverse Party:- When the original document is in the possession or
control of the person against whom it is being used, and they do not produce it even after being given
notice under Section 66, secondary evidence can then be presented.
b) When the original has been destroyed or lost
c) When the original is of such a nature as not to be easily movable.
d) When the original is a public document within the meaning of Section 74 (Certified Copy).
 e) Original Consisting of numerous account:- when the originals consist of numerous accounts or other
documents which cannot conveniently be examined in Court, in that case the expert is appointed, who will
examine the whole document and report of that expert will be considered as secondary document.
f) When the original is a document of which a certified copy (Section 74 ) is permitted by this Act
Case Laws:- State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu (2005): In this case, the SC clarified that secondary
evidence can be admitted only when the original document is either destroyed or lost, and reasonable efforts have
been made to obtain the original.

PROOF OF ATTESTED DOCUMENTS

A document signed by a witness (attestor) who saw the party execute it. Common examples include wills, gift
deeds, mortgage deeds, etc.

Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested SECTION 67

- shall not be used as evidence until 1 attesting witnessed at least has been called for the purpose of proving
its execution.
- But calling the witnesses to prove the document is not required if the document has been registered in
accordance with the provisions of Indian registration act 1908.

In case the attestor is absent. (Proof where no attesting witness found)

SECTION 68 : Even if a witness can't come to court, you can prove the document by showing:

• The attestor's signature is genuine (his handwriting), and

• The person who made the document actually signed it.

Write a note on proof of electronic records.

SECTION 61 nothing in this act shall apply to deny the admissibility of an electronic or digital record in the evidence
on the ground that it is an electronic or digital record and such record shall, subject to section 63, have the same legal effect,
validity and enforceability as other document.

SECTION 62: contents of the electronic record must be proved as per section 63.

SECTION 63:

63(2) THE ELECTRONIC RECORD MUST HAVE BEEN:

• Produced by a computer during regular use;

The computer that created the electronic record must be used regularly by the person or organization – not
occasionally or randomly.

Example:
A company keeps daily attendance records on a computer. That computer is used every day by the HR staff. So,
an attendance sheet from that system would qualify under this condition.

Counter-example:
If someone borrowed a friend's laptop and typed some data in it only once, that’s not “regular use.”
 • The computer was functioning properly during that time;

Example:
A CCTV camera was recording live footage, and the hard drive was working without error. That footage is
considered reliable.

Counter-example:
If the computer crashed halfway, or had a virus that altered the files, then its output might not be reliable.

• The information was regularly fed into the computer in the ordinary course of business;

The data was entered into the computer as a routine part of business activities, not for the sake of evidence later.

• The data was stored and retrieved in a proper manner.

There should be no tampering with the data. It must be safely stored and accurately retrieved for
presentation in court.

Example:
A customer complaint email is stored safely in a company’s email server. When retrieved later, it’s found
unchanged and presented with its full header information.

Counter-example:
If someone edits or deletes parts of an email or alters a file before presenting it to court, it will fail this
condition.

63(3) REQUIREMENT OF A CERTIFICATE

• Identification of the Electronic Record

➤ What is the file or data you are relying on?
(e.g., CCTV clip of 12 June 2024, 3:15 PM)

• Manner of Production
➤ How was it created? Was it downloaded, exported, printed, etc.?
(e.g., chat exported from WhatsApp to email in .txt format)

• Details of the Computer/Device Used

➤ From which system/device was it produced?
(e.g., Lenovo laptop with serial number ABC123, running Windows 10)

• Compliance with Section 63(2)

➤ Confirm that the computer was used regularly, worked properly, data was entered in ordinary course, and
stored/retrieved correctly.

• Signature of a Responsible Officer

➤ Must be signed by someone responsible for the device – like an IT head, system admin, manager, etc.
(This person takes responsibility for the accuracy of the data.)

What are the Public Document ? How are they proved ?

Introduction

• There are two of Document: Public Section 74(1) AND 74(2) and Private (Section 75)
• The proof of Public Document is given under Section 76 and 77.

Meaning of Public Document- Section 74

74(1) The following documents are public documents:

a) forming the acts or records of the acts
- sovereign authority
- official bodies and tribunals
- public officers, legislative, judicial, and executive of India out of a foreign country
b) public records kept in any state or union territory of private documents

74(2) all other documents except the documents referred to in subsection (1) are private

Private documents though made by an individual person, but it is kept as records in the public offices are regarded
as a public document. Eg:- AOA and MOU with the register of company.
Case Law:- Narattam Das V. Md. Masadharali:- Private Document would be called a ‘Public Document’ under
the purview of section 74(2) if the Private Document is filed and public official is required to keep it for a
memorial or permanent evidence of something written, said or done.

Proof of Public Document- Section 75, 76, 78

1) Method of obtaining Certified Copy:- Section 75

➢ It states that if a public document is open to inspection, it’s copy may be issued to any person who is
demanding it. The copy of the public document is issued on payment of legal fees and a certificate.
➢ The Certificate must contain the following particulars:
a) That it is a true copy.
b) The date of the issue of the copy.
c) The name of the officer and his official title.
d) The seal of the office, if there is any.
e) It must be dated.
➢ When these particulars are mentioned in the copy, then only it is considered as a Certified Copy.

2) Proof of Documents by the production of certified copies: - Section 76

It states that, when the contents of the public documents are to be proof in court of law, the original copy of the
public document need not be presented before the court, instead the certified copy of the public document taken
from the public officer in accordance with section 76 and that would be presented before the court which would
be accepted by the court.
3) Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies:- Section 78 (Own- Court presume the Copy is
certified copy produced under the compliance of section 76 is genuine.)