Descriptive Questions With Answers: 1. To Which Proceedings Is The Indian Evidence Act Applicable?

B-84 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS
Ii Descriptive Questions with Answers l

1. To which proceedings Is the Indian Evidence Act applicable?
Ans. : The Act applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including
Courts-Martial.
2. To which proceedings Is the Indian Evidence Act not applicable?

Ans. : The Act does not apply to -
(i) affidavits presented to any Court or officer, or
(ii) proceedings before an arbitrator, or
(iii) proceedings before a Court-Martial convened under the Army Act, the Naval
Discipline Act, the Indian Navy (Discipline) Act, 1934, or the Air Force Act.
3. Define "Affidavit" . .
Ans. : An affidavit is a statement or declaration of a person (in writing) made on
oath or affirmation before a person having authority to administer an oath or
affirmation (as for instance, a Magistrate or a Notary). It is expressly provided that
the Act does not apply to affidavits. Nor are affidavits included in the definition of
evidence under S. 3 of the Act. This is so because in an affidavit, the deponent (that
is, the person who make the affidavit) asserts certain things based on his personal 1
knowledge. Normally, contempt proceedings are decided on the basis of affidavits.

So also, affidavit evidence is accepted in interlocutory matters.
4. What Is the principle aim of Arbitration?

Ans. : The principal aim of arbitration is to have a controversial matter decided
without wasting time and money on a regular suit in a Court of Law. Legal
technicalities do not, therefore, attach to proceedings before an arbitrator, and it has
therefore been expressly provided that the Act does not apply to such proceeding s.
Thus, the strict rules of evidence or the technical rules of procedure do not apply to
arbitration proceedings. Similarly, an arbitration award cannot be set aside on the
ground that a particular document was improperly received by the arbitrator. However,
the arbitrator must always conform to the rules ofnatural justice.
THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT B-65
5. Why are arbitrators excluded from the ambit of the Act?

Ans. : Arbitrators are specially excluded from the ambit of the Act, because such
persons are chosen for their respectability and the confidence reposed in them by the
parties to the dispute. Arbitrators are, therefore, not expected to apply the rules of
evidence in proceedings before them, but are expected to act according to fundamental
principles of fairness and justice, e.g., not recording evidence in the absence of one
of the parties, and so on.
6. Define "Court".
Ans. : The term "Court" includes all Judges and Magistrates, and all persons (except
arbitrators) legally authorised to take evidence.
The definition of "Court" is not exhaustive, but framed only for the purpose of the
Act; it is not to be extended where such extension is not warranted.
7. Define and Explain Fact.
Ans.: "Fact" means and includes-
(i) Any-
(a) thing,
(b) state of things capable of being
or perceived by the senses.
(c) relation of things 1
8. Define "relevant".
Ans. : One fact is said to be relevant to another when the one is connected with the
other in any of the ways referred to in the provisions of this Act relating to the
relevancy of facts.
9. Which are the facts recognised to be relevant under the Act?
Ans. : The facts that are recognised to be relevant under the Act (by Ss. 5-55) may be
grouped as follows:
1. Facts logically connected with facts in issue or relevant facts : Ss. 5-16.
2. Admissions and confessions : Ss. 17-31.
3. Statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses: Ss. 32 and 33.
4. Statements under special circumstances: Ss. 34-37.
B-66 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIO NS & DESCRIP TIVE QU ESTIONS WITH ANSWERS
5. Judgments in other cases : Ss. 40-44.

6. Opinions of third persons : Ss. 45-51.
7. Evidence as to charact er: Ss. 52-55.
10. What Is meant by 'Fact In Issue'?

Ans.: A "fact in issue" means:
Any fact from which
either by itself or
in connection with other facts,
(i) the existence,
(ii) non-existence,
(iii) nature, or
(iv) extent
of any (a) right,
(b) liability, or
(c) disability
asserte d or denied in any suit or proceedings, necessarily follows.
11. What are the differences between 'Relevant Fact and Fact in issue'?
Ans. : Differences between 'Relevant Fact and Fact in issue'
Relevant Fact Fact in issue

1. A relevantfact, on the other hand, is 1. A fact in issue is a necess ary
not a necessary ingredient of a right ingredient of a right or liability. It is
or liability. from such fact, either by itself or in
connection with other facts, that the
existence or non-existence of a right
or liability necessarily follows.
2. A releva nt fact is called the 2. A fact in issue is called the ''principal
"evidentiary fact" orfactum pro bans. fact" or factum probandum.
THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT
B-87
12. Define 'Document'?

Ans. : The term "document" means any matter expressed or described upon any
substance by means of letters, figures or marks, or by more than one of those means,
intended to be used, or which may be used, for the purpose of recording that matter.
13. Define and explain 'Evidence".
Ans. : The term "evidence" means and includes -
(i) Oral evidence - i.e., all statements which the Court permits or requires to be
made before it by witnesses, in relation to matters of fact under inquiry; and
(ii) Documentary evidence - i.e., all documents, including electronic records,
produced for the inspection of the Court.
~
The above definition of the term "evidence" is not a complete definition. Evidence,
thus defined, is not the only medium of proof; in addition to it, there are a number of
other matters like the demeanour of a witness, which the Court has to take into
consideration when forming its conclusion. The definition of 'evidence' has to be
read with word "proved" (see below) when determining what is 'evidence' within
the scope of the Act.
14. What are the different kinds of Evidence?
Ans. : The following are the nine different types of evidence:
1. Direct evidence
2. Circumstantial evidence
3. Real evidence
4. Hearsay evidence
5. Primary evidence
6. Secondary evidence
7. Oral evidence
8. Documentary evidence
9. Conclusive evidence
B-68 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS WITH,ANSWERS
15. Distinguish between Direct and Circumstantial Evidence.

Ans.:
Direct Evidence Circumstantial Evidence
1. Direct evidence is the testimony of 1. Circumstantial evidence is the
the witnesses as to the principal fact testimony of a witness to other
to be proved, e.g., the evidence of a relevant facts from which the fact in
person who says that he saw the issue may be inferred.
commission of the act which
constitutes the alleged crime.
2. Direct evidence is of a superior 2. The other has in addition, a further
cogency; its greatest advantage is source of error, viz., fallibility of
that there is only one source of error, inference. The weight of evidence
namely, fallibility of testimony. varies according to the number of
independent facts supported.
·-
16. When is a fact said to be 'proved'?
Ans. : A fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters before it, the
Court either believes it to exist, or considers its existence so probable that a prudent
man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition
that it exists.
17. When is a fact said to be 'disaproved'?
Ans. : A fact is said to be disproved when, after considering the matters before it, the
Court believes that it does not exist, or considers its non-existence so probable that
a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the
supposition that it does not exist.
18. When is a fact said to be 'not proved'?
Ans. : A fact is said not to be proved when it is neither proved nor disproved.
19. What is meant by 'Court may Presume'?
Ans. : Whenever the Act lays down that the Court may presume a fact, it has a
discretion to presume it as proved, or to call for confirmatory evidence of it. Thus,
the Court may presume that a message forwarded from a telegraph office corresponds
with the message delivered for transmission at the office (S. 88), or the Court may
THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT . B-69
presume that a certified copy of foreign judicial records is genuine and accurate (S.
86); but in either case, the Court can also call for further evidence.
20. What is meant by 'Court shall Presume'?
Ans. : When the Act lays down that the Courts hall presume a certain fact, the Court
has no option in the matter, and it is bound to take the fact as proved, unless the party
interested in disproving it produces sufficient evidence for that purpose. Thus, the
Court has to presume the genuineness of every document purporting to be the London
Gazette or the Official Gazette (S. 81). Similarly, the Court shall presume the accuracy
of maps and plans made by a Government authority (S. 83). Likewise, the Court
shall presume that a power-of-attorney purporting to be executed before a proper
authority was so executed (S. 85), and so on.
21. Define 'Presumption'.
Ans.: The term 'presumption' in its widest and most comprehensive sense, may be
defined to be an inference, affirmative or disaffirmative, of the truth of falsehood of
a doubtful fact or proposition drawn by a process of probable reasoning from
something proved or taken for granted.
In law, a presumption means a rule of law that Courts and judges shall draw a
particular inference from a particular fact or from a particular evidence, unless and
until the truth of such inference is disproved.
22. What is meant by 'Presumption of Fact'?
Ans. : Presumptions of fact, or natural presumptions, are inferences which are
naturally and logically drawn from experience and observ~tion of the course of nature,
the constitution of the human mind, the order of things in the world, etc.; they are
akin to the expression 'may presume' of this Act.
23. What is meant by 'Presumption of Law'?
Ans. : Presumptions of law, sometimes called intendments of law, are inferences
and propositions established by common law or statute; they are either (i) absolute,
corresponding to the expression "conclusive proof' of this Act, or (ii) rebuttable,
i.e., corresponding to the expression "shall presume" of this Act.
B-70 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS WITH
ANSWE RS
24. Differentiate between "Presumption of Law' and 'Presumption

of Fact'•
Ans.:
Presumptions ofLaw Presumptions of Fact
1. Discretion of Cour t: No discretion 1. A discretion, more or less exten sive
is veste d in the Court at all. The law as to drawing the inference, is veste d
perem ptori ly requi res a certa in in the tribunal.
inference to be made when ever the
facts appea r which the law assumes
as the basis of the inference.
2. Rules of law : Presumptions of law 2. Presumptions of fact are not rules
of
are, in reality rules of law and part law.
of the law itself.
3. Presumptions of law must be drawn. 3. Presumptions of fact may or may not
4. Kind s : There are two kinds of be drawn.
presu mptio ns of law - rebuttable 4. - There is no such divisi on in the case
and irrebuttable. of presumptions of fact.
25. What is "Conclusive Proof"?

Ans. : When one fact is declared by the Evidence Act to be concl usive proof
of
another, the Court must, on proof of the one fact, regard the other prove d, and
canno t
allow evide nce to be given for the purpose of disproving it.
Conc lusive presu mptio ns are inferences which the law make s so perem ptoril y
that it
will not allow them to be overturned by any contrary proof, however strong.
26. What is 'Relevant Fact'.

Ans. : One fact is releva nt to another when the one is connected with the other in
any
of the ways referr ed to in Sections 5 to 55.
27. Of what fact may evidence be given?

Ans. : Evide nce may be given of the existence or non-existence of every fact in issue
and of relevant facts, and of no others.
28. When can Evidence be given of fact is issue?

Ans. : Evidence can be given of a fact only if it is either a fact in issue or one
declared to be relevant under the following sections. Thus, evidence of all collateral
facts which are incapable of affording any reasonable presumption as to the principal
matters in dispute, are excluded in order to save public time. When the evidence is
tendered, if it is prima facie admissible, it is for the other side to show that it is not
admissible.
If the Evidence Act prescribes a particular manner in which evidence is to be given,
evidence must be given in that manner, and in no other manner.
29. When do facts not otherwise relevant become relevant?

Ans. : 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.
30. What is res gestae?

Ans. : Facts forming part of a transaction are described by English and American
writers as being part of res gestae, i.e., things done (including words spoken) in the
course of a transaction.
31. State the instances of "res gestae'

Ans.:
Facts What matters become relevant
(a) A is accused of the murder of B by (a) Whatever was said or done by A or
beating him. B or the bystanders at the beating,
or so shortly before or ·after it as to
form part of the transaction, is a
relevant fact.
(b) A is accused of waging war against (b) The occurrence of events (i) to (iii)
the Government of India by taking is relevant as forming part of the
part in an armed insurrection in general transaction, though A may
which (i) property is destroyed, (ii) not have been present at all of them.
troops are attacked, and (iii) gaols
are broken open.
(c) A sues B for a libel contained in a (c) Letters between the parties relating
letter forming part of a correspon- to the subject out of which the libel
dence. arose, and forming part of the
correspondence in which it is
contained, are relevant facts, though
they do not contain the libel itself.
(d) The question is, whether certain (d) Each delivery is a relevant fact.
goods ordered from B were delivered
to A . The goods were delivered to
several intermediate persons succes-
sively.
32. What is motive and preparation?

Ans. : Any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for
any fact in issue or relevant fact.
33. State the instances of motive and preparation.
Ans.:
Facts in use What fact become relevant
(a) A is tried for the murder of B. (a) The facts that
-
.
~
(i) A murdered C;
-
(ii) B knew that A had murdered
C;and
(iii) B had tried to extort money
from A by threatening to make
his (B s) knowledge public -
are relevant: ('Motive')
(b) A sues B upon a bond for the (b) The fact that, at the time when the
payment of money. B denies the bond was alleged to be made, B
making of the bond. required money for a particular
purpose,-is relevant: ('Motive')
t THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT
8-73
(c) A is tried for the murder of B by (c) The fact that, before the death of B,
poison. A procured poison similar to that
which was administer ed to B, is
relevant: ('Preparation ').
(d) The question is whether a certain (d) The facts that, not long before the
document is the will of A. date of the alleged will -
(i) A made an inquiry into mat-
ters to which the provisions of
the alleged will relate;
(ii) that A consulted Vakils in
reference to making the will;
and that,
(iii) he caused drafts of other wills
to be prepared of which he did
not approve, - are relevant :
('Preparation' and 'Previous
conduct').
34. What is previous or subsequent conduct?

Ans.: The conduct (previous or subsequent) of-
(i) a party, or
(ii) his agent, or which Influences or (i) a fact in issue, or
(iii) an accused is influenced (ii) relevant fact.
by
is relevant.
35. Give instances (examples) of Conduct.
Ans.:
Facts in use What fact are relevant
(a) A is accused of a crime. The facts that, either before or at the time
of, or after the alleged crime, -
(i) A provided evidence which would
tend to give to the facts of the case
an appearanc e favourabl e to
himself; or that
(ii) A destroyed or concealed evidence;

or
(iii) A prevented the presence or
procured the absence of witnesses,
or
(iv) A suborned persons to give false
evidence - are relevant :
('Previous and subsequent
conduct')
(b) A sues B upon a bond for the The facts that -
payment of money. B denies the (i) A absconded after receiving a letter
making of the bond. warning him that inquiry was being
made for the criminal and the
contents of the letter are relevant.
(ii) After the commission of the crime,
A absconded or was in possession
of property or the proceeds thereof;
or that-
(iii) A attempted to conceal things
which were or might have been
used in committing the crime, -
- . are relevant : (Subsequent conduct)
36. What is common intention?

Ans.:
Where there is an offence or an anything said, (i) 1n refer-
reasonable ground actionable wrong, done, or written by ence to their com-
to believe that two any one of such mon intention
or more persons persons
(ii) after the time
have conspired
when such inten-
together to commit
tion was first
entertained by any
oneofthem-
as against each of the persons believed to be so conspiring, as

is a relevant fact well as for the purpose of
(i) proving the existence of the conspiracy, and
(ii) showing that he was a party to it.
37. What is plea of alibi?
Ans. : The fact of presence elsewhere is essentially inconsistent with the presence at
the place and time alleged, and therefore, with personal participation in the act. It is
on this that the theory of alibi is based.
Thus, if a person is charged with having committed a particular offence in Mumbai
on a particular day, if he produces his passport to prove that he was in England on
that day, this would be a good alibi. ·
38. Define admission.

Ans. : An admission·is a statement, oral or documentary, or contained in electronic
form, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevantfact, and which
is ·made by any of the persons, and under the circumstances mentioned below.
39. Explain 'Admission'.

Ans. : An 'admission'· is a statement of fact which waives or dispenses with the
production of evidence, by conceding that the fact asserted by the opponent is true.
Admissions are followed because the conduct of a party to a proceeding, in respect
of the matter in dispute, whether by acts, speech, or writing, which is clearly
inconsistent with the truth of his contention, is a fact relevant to the issue. Admissions
constitute a very week kind of evidence, and the Court may reject them if it is satisfied,
from other circumstances, that they are untrue.
An admission is a voluntary acknowledgment made by a party, or someone identified
with him in legal interest, of the existence of certain facts which are in issue or
relevant to an issue in the case. The predominant characteristic ofthis type of evidence
consists in its binding character.
40. What are the different types of 'Admissions'?

Ans.: Admissions are broadly classified into two categories: (a)judicial admissions,
and (b) extra-judicial admissions. Judicial admissions are formal admissions made
by a party to the proceeding in the case. Extra-judicial admissions are informal
B-76 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS WITH
ANSWE RS
admissions not appearing on the record of the case. Judicial admissions, being made
in the case, are fully binding on the party who makes them. They constitute a waive
r
of proof. They can be made the foundation of the rights of the parties.
41. Which statements are admissions?
Ans. : Statements made by the following six classes ofperso ns are admissions,
viz.
1. A party to the proceeding (civil or criminal) or by his agent. (S. 18)
2. Parties suing or being sued in a representative character (e.g., trustees, executors,
assignee of a bankrupt, etc.) while they hold that character. (S. 18)
3. Persons having propr ietary or pe- (i) in their chara cter of perso ns so
cunia ry interest in the proceeding, interested, and
ifthe statements are made -
(ii) durin g the conti nuan ce of their
interest. (S. 18)
4. Persons from whom the parties to the suit have deriv ed their interest in the
subject-matter of the suit, provi ded that the statements are made durin g the
contin uance of the interest of the person making the statement. (S. 18)
5. Persons whose position or liability it is necessary t9 prove as against any party
to the suit if the statements are made during the continuance of such position or
liability, and are such as would be relevant as against such persons (in relation
to such position or liability) in a suit brought by or against them. (S. 19)
6. Persons to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in
reference to a matte r in dispute. (S. 20)
42. Against whom 'admission' may be proved?
Ans. : Admissions are relevant and may be proved as against -
(i) the person who makes them, or
(ii) his representative in interest.
43. When are oral admissions as to contents of documents not releva
nt?
Ans. : Oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant, unless
and
until -
(i) the party proposing to prove them shows that he is entitled to give secondary
evidence of the contents of such document; or
(ii) the genuineness of a document produced is in question.
j THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT B-77
i
44. When are admissions not relevant in Civil cases?
Ans. : In civil cases, no admission is relevant if it is made -
'
(i) upon an express condition, or
(ii) under circumstances from which the Court can infer that the parties agreed
togeth er-
that evidence of it should not be given.
45. Define and explain 'Confession'.

Ans. : The expression "confession" has not been defined in the Evidence Act. A
confession is a statement which either admits the offence, or at any rate, substantially
all the facts which constitute the offence. Stephen in his Digest of Law of Evidence,
defines it thus : "A confession is an admission made at any time by a person charged
with a crime, stating or suggesting an inference that he commit ted the crime. " This
definition was adopted by the Courts in India in a number of cases.
46. What is 'Retracted Confession'?

Ans. : A retracted confession is one which is withdrawn or retracted later on by the
person making it. Such a confession, if proved to be voluntarily made, can be acted
upon along with the other evidence in the case, and there is no legal requirement that
a retract ed confes sion must be suppor ted by indepe ndent reliable eviden ce
corroborating it in material particulars. The use to be made of such a confession is a
matter of pruden ce rather than of law.
47. What are the important rules regarding confessions which are.refracted? .
Ans. ; Three important rules regarding confessions which are retracted are:
1. A confession is not to be regarded as involuntary merely because it is retracted
later on.
2. As against the maker of the confession, the retracted confession may form the
basis of a conviction if it is believed to be true and voluntarily made.
3. The confession of a co-accused cannot be treated as substantive evidence, and
can be pressed into service only when the Court is inclined to accept other evidence
and feels the necessity ofseeking an assurance in support of its conclusions deductible
from the said evidence. In crimina l cases, where the other evidence adduce d against
an accuse d person is wholly unsatisfactory, and the prosecution seeks to rely on the
retracte d confession of a co-accused person, the presumption of innocence, which is
4
the basis of criminal jurisprudence, assists the accused person and compels the Court
to render the verdict that the charge is not proved.
48. What are 'Extra Judicial Confessions'?

Ans. : Extra-judicial confessions are those confessions which are made either to the '
police orto any other person other than judges and magistrates as such. The Supreme
Court has observed in State ofPunjab v. Bhajen Singh (1975 4 S.C.C. 472) that an
extra-judicial confession is a very weak piece ofevidence.
An extra-judicial confession, if voluntary, can be relied upon by the Court, along 1
with other evidence, in convicting an accused. The confession will have to be proved
1
just like any other fact. The value of evidence as to the confession, just like any other
evidence, depends upon the veracity of the witness to whom it is made. Usually and 1
a~ a matter of caution, Courts require some material corroboration to such a

1
confessional statement, i.e., corroboration which connects the accused person with
the crime in question.
49. Distinguish between Confession and Admission.

Ans. : Difference between Confession and Admission -
(1) A confession is a statement made by a1:1 accused person admitting that he has
committed an offence, or at any rate, substantially all the facts which constitute
the offence. Confessions find place·in ·criminal proceedings only. An admission
is a general term which suggests an inference as to any fact in issue or any
relevant fact. Admissions are generally used in civil proceedings; yet they may l
also be used in criminal proceedings. Every confession is an admission, but
every admission in a criminal case is not a confession. A statement may be
irrelevant as a confession, but it may be relevant as an admission. A statement 1
not admissible as a confession may yet, for other purposes, be admissible as an

admission as against the person who made it. (Section 21)
(2) A confession, if deliberately and voluntarily made, may be accepted as evidence
in itself of the matters confessed, though as a rule of prudence, the Courts may 1
require corroborative evidence; but an admission is not a conclusive proof of
the matters admitted, though it may operate as an estoppel.
(3) A confession always goes against the person making it, except under section 1
30, under which the confession of one or more accused jointly tried for the
co-accused. An admission,
offence can be taken into consideration against the
the con trary, may be used on beh alf of the person making it under the
on
by one of several defendants
exceptions provided in Sec. 21; but an admission
.
in a suit is no evidence against another defendant
50. When are the Confessions irrelevant?

ble in the following three cases
Ans. : A confession becomes irrelevant and inadmissi
mentioned in Ss. 24, 25 and 26:
mise from a person in authority
1. ·confession caused by inducement, threat or pro
(S. 24)
2. Confession to police (S. 25)
26)
3. Confession not made before a Magistrate (S.
threat or promise from a person
51 ~ What is Confession caused by inducement,
in authority?
: con fession mad e by an accused is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding, if the
An s. A
e been caused by any
making of the confession appears to the Court to hav
(i) inducement,
(ii) threat, or
(iii) promise,
used,
(a) having reference to the charge against the acc
(b) proceeding from a person in authority,
the accused person ground
(c) sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give
that by making it, he
which would appear to him reasonable for supposing
poral nature in reference
would gain any advantage or avoid any evil ofa tem
to the proceedings against him.
act the provisions of s. 24?
52. What_are the necessary conditions to attr
ng facts must the established:
Ans. : To attract the provisions of S. 24, the followi
accused person to a person in
(a) The confession must have been made by an
ve.)
authority. (As to who is a person in authority, see abo
It must app ear t~ the Cou rt that the confessi~n has been caused or obtained by
(b) .
ceeding from a person 1n
reason. of any mducement, threat or promise pro
authonty.
(c) The inducement, thereat or promise must have reference to the charge againSt
the accused person.
(d) The inducement, threat or promise must, in the opinion of the Court, be such
that it would appear to the Court that the accused, in making the confession,
believed or supposed that he would, by making it, gain any advantage, or avoid
any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him.
53. What is Confession by Police?

Ans. : Under S. 25, no confession made to a po/ice-officer can be proved as against
an accused.
The object of Section 25 and Section 26 is to prevent the practice of oppression or
torture by the police for the purpose of extracting confessions from accused persons.
Under this section, no confession made to a police-officer is admissible against the
accused. Any incriminating statement made by an accused to a police-officer is
inadmissible in evidence. Under the next section, a confession made to a private
person in the custody of the police and not made in the immediate presence of a
Magistrate, is also inadmissible in evidence.
54. What is meant by Confession not made before a Magistrate?

Ans. : Under S. 26, no confession made by any person whilst he is in custody of a
police-officer, can be proved as against such person, unless such a confession is
made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate.
This section also aims at remedying the same mischief as is contemplated in the
preceding section. S. 25 makes inadmissible a confession made by an accused to the
police. This section (S. 26) goes a step further to provide that a confession made by
a person while in a police custody to a third person (i.~., other than a police- officer)
is also not admissible, unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate.
The presence of a Magistrate is, by a legal fiction, regarded as equivalent to removal
of police influence, and the statement is, therefore, not rendered inadmissible.
55. When are the confessions relevant?

Ans. : The following three types of confessions are relevant and admissible:
1. Confession made after removal of threat, inducement or promise (S. 28)
2. Confession made under promise, deception, etc. (S. 29)
3. Confession leading to discovery of fact (S. 27)
B-81
56. What Is Confession made after removal of threat, Inducement or promise?

Ans. : If such a confession, as is referred to in S. 24, is made after the impression
caused by any such inducement, threat or promise has, in the opinion of the Court,
been fully removed, it is relevant.
This is an exception to the rule contained in S. 24. It lays down the conditions under
which a confession, which is rendered irrelevant by,.S.. 24, may become relevant. If
it is proved, to the complete satisfaction of the Co~, that the impression produced
by the threat or promise has been totally removed, e.g., by lapse of time or by any
interven ing caution given by a person of superior (but not of equal or inferior)
authority, a confession subsequently made will be admissible. Such a confession is
placed on the same footing as a voluntary confession. In all cases, it is for the Judge
to properly weigh all the facts and circumstances of the case to come to a definite
conclusi on that the impression caused by the inducement, threat or promise has been
complete ly removed.
57. What is meant by Confession made under promise, deception?

Ans. : If a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant, merely
because it was made -
(a) under a promise of secrecy; or
(b) in consequences of a deception practised on the accused person for the purpose
of obtaining it; or
( c) when the accused was drunk; or
( d) in answer to questions he need not have answered; or
(e) when the accused was not warned -
(i) that he was not bound to make such confession, and
(ii) that evidence of it might be given against him.
58. What is confession leading to discovery of fact?

Ans. : When any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information
receivedfrom an accused person in the custody of a police-officer, so much of such
informat ion (whether it amounts to a confession or not), as relates distinctly to the
fact thereby discovered, may be proved.
Section 27 is founded on the principle that if the confession of the accused is supported
by the discovery of a fact, it may be presumed to be true and not to have been extracted.
This rule comes into operation only-
B-82 MULTiPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS
(I) if and when certain facts are deposed to as discovered in consequence of

information received from an accused person in police custody; and
(2) if the information relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered. The broad
ground for not admitting confessions made under the inducement, threat, or promise
to a police-officer is the danger of admitting false confessions. However, the necessity
for this exclusion disappears in a case provided for by this section, when the truth of
the confession is guaranteed by the discovery of facts in consequence of the
information given.
59. What is the provision of Law regarding Statements by person who cannot be
called as witness?
Ans. : Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who -
(a) is dead, or
(b) cannot be found, or
(c) has become incapable of giving evidence, or
(d) cannot be produced without unreasonable delay or expense, -
are themselves relevant in eight cases given below.
I. Dying declaration [S. 32(1)]
2. Statements made in ordinary course of business [S. 32(2)]
3. Statements against interest of maker [S. 32(3)]
4. Opinion as to public right, custom, etc. [S. 32(4)]
5. Statement as to existence of relationship [S. 32(5)]
6. Statement in will or deed relating to family affairs [S. 32(6)] ·
7. Statement in a document relating to a transaction creating a right [S. 32(7)]
8. Several persons expressing feelings [S. 32(8)]
60. What is a dying declaration?

Ans. : A dying declaration is a statement made by a dying person as to the cause of
his death or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his
death.
If the person making the dying declaration chances to live, his statement is
inadmissible as a dying declaration, but it might be relied on under S. 158 to
corroborate his testimony when examined.
THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT 8-83
61. On which grounds the dying declaration are admitted?

Ans. : The three main grounds on which dying declarations are admitted are:
1. Death of the declarant;
2. Necessity : The victim being generally the only eye-witness to the crime, the
exclusion of his statement would tend to defeat the ends ofjustice; and
3. The sense ofimpending death, which creates a sanction equal to the obligation
of an oath.
62. What is the method of proving dying declaration?

Ans. : Statements relating to dying declarations, whether oral or written, must be
duly proved. If the statement is oral, persons who heard the statement should depose
what they have heard. In the case of written statements, it must be proved by the
evidence of the person who recorded it.
If a dying declaration is made to a Magistrate, whether such a statement itself can be
admitted as evidence without calling the Magistrate as a witness, has been subjected
to a great deal of controversy.
63. What is the evidential value of a dying declaration?

Ans.: In Ramnath v. State, (1953 S.C. 420), the Supreme Court has observed that it
is a settled law that it is not safe to convict an accused person merely on the evidence
furnished by a dying declaration, without further corroboration, because such a
statement is not made on oath, and is not subject to cross-examination, and because
the maker of such a statement might be mentally and physically in a state of confusion
and might well be drawing upon his imagination when he was making the declaration.
64. What are the differences between a dying declaration and a deposition?
Ans.:
Dying declaration Deposition
1. A dying declaration is a statement 1. A deposition has to be made before
made by a deceased person to a Magistrate and in the presence of
anybody who happens to be present the accused.
when it is made. 2. A deposition must be made on oath
2. It follows, therefore, that a dying and before a person authorised by
declaration is not made on oath. law to take evidence.
r
3. A dying declaration is also not sub- 3. A deposition is subject to cross-

ject to cross-examination and there- examination, and therefore, stronger
fore, is weaker than a deposition. than a dying declaration.
65. Explain why the statements made in ordinary course of business are relevant?
Ans.: When the statement is made by such a person (i.e., a person who is dead or
cannot be found, etc.) in the ordinary course of business, and in particular when it
consists of any -
(a) an entry or memorandum made by him in books kept in -
(i) the ordinary course of business, or
(ii) the discharge ofprofessional duty; or
(b) an acknowledgment (written or signed by him) of the receipt of money, goods,
securities or properties of any kind, or
(c) documents used in commerce, written or signed by him, or
(d) the date ofa letter or other document usually dated, written or signed by him,-
are relevant.
66. Explain why the statements against interest of maker are relevant?
Ans. : When the statement -
(a) is against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the person making it, or
(b) would, if true, expose him to a criminal prosecution or suit for damages,
such a statement is itself relevant.
67. Explain why the statements as to existence of relationship is relevant?
Ans. : When the statement relates to the existence of relationship by blood, marriage 1
or adoption between persons as to whose relationship by blood, marriage or adoption, ~
the person making the statement had special means of knowledge, and such statement
was made before the question of dispute was raised, such a statement is relevant. ~
68. Explain why the statement in will or deed relating to family affairs is relevant? ◄
Ans. : When the statement relates to the existence of any relationship by blood, i
marriage or adoption between deceased persons, and is made in a will or deed 4
relating to the affairs of family of the deceased or upon any tombstone, family portrait
or other things on which such statements are usually made, and made before the
question in dispute was raised, such a statement is relevant.
69. When are entries in books of account relevant?

Ans. : Entries in books of account, including those maintained in an electronic form,
regularly kept in the course ofbusiness, are relevant, whenever they refer to a matter
into which the Court has to inquire; but such statements are not alone sufficient
evidence to charge any person with liability.
70. Distinguish between Judgments in personam and Judgments in rem.

Ans. : Difference between Judgments in personam and Judgments in rem
Judgments in personam Judgments in rem
1. These are judgments between parties 1. Judgments in rem are judgments by
in cases of contract, tort, crime, etc. a Court having special jurisdiction.
2. They are conclusive proof, in 2. They are conclusive evidence for or
subsequent ,proceedings, between against all persons whether parties,
the same parties or their privies. privies or strangers.
71. When are opinions of third person relevant?

Ans. : Opinions of third persons, when relevant (Ss. 45-51)
1. Opinions as to foreign law, science, handwriting, etc. (Expert evidence) (Ss. 45,
46)
2. Opinion as to handwriting (S. 47)
3. Opinion as to right or custom (S. 48)
4. Opinion as to ~sages, tenets, etc. (S. 49)
5. Opinion as to relationship (Ss. 50 & 51)
72. Who is an expert?

Ans. : The expression "expert" covers 'person specially skilled'. An expert may be
defined as a person who, by practice and observation, has become experienced in
any science or trade. He is one who has devoted time and study to a special branch of
learning, and is thus specially skilled in that field wherein he is called to give his
opinion. Toe term implies both superior knowledge and practical experience in the
art or profession, but generally, nothing more is required to entitle one to give
testimony as an expert than that he had been educated in a particular art or profession.
73. When Is the opinion of an expert relevant?

Ans. : When the Court has to form an opinion -
(a) upon a point of foreign law or science or art; or
(b) as to the identity of handwriting or finger impressions,- the opinions upon that
point of experts (i.e., persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or
art, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions) are
relevant. (S. 45)
74. When is the opinion of a handwriting expert relevant?

Ans. : The Supreme Court has observed that the evidence of a hand-writing expert
need not invariably be corroborated. It is for the Court to decide whether to accept
such uncorroborated evidence or not. This question should be approached cautiously
by the Court, and after examining the reasoning behind the expert opinion and after
considering all other evidence, the Court should reach its conclusion.
75. How Foreign law may be proved?

Ans. : Foreign law may be proved-.
(i) by the evidence of a person specially skilled in it (S. 45); or
(ii) by direct reference to books printed or published under the authority of the
foreign Government (S. 38).
76. Explain in detail when the character of a person is relevant in civil and criminal
cases.
Ans. : In civil cases, a party's character cannot be proved for the purpose of showing
that any conduct attributed to him is probable or improbable. (S. 52)
A party's character is relevant whenever it affects the amount of damages which he
ought to receive.(S. 55)
In criminal proceedings, the fact that the accused is of a good character is relevant.
(S. 53)
A previous conviction is relevant as evidence of bad character. (S. 54)
Evidence of the accused's bad character is relevant (i) to rebut evidence of good
character, or (ii) where his bad character is itself a fact in issue. (S. 54)
77 • When is the character of a person Irrelevant in civil and criminal cases?

Ans. : The fact that the character of any person concerned is such as to render probable
or improbable any conduct imputed to him is irrelevant. (S. 52)
In criminal proceedings, the bad character of the accused is irrelevant, except -
(i) in reply to evidence given of his good character, or
(ii) where the bad character itself is a/act in issue. (S. 54)
78. When is character relevant?
Ans. : In civil cases, good character of a person is presumed. So, good character of
a person cannot be proved in aggravation of damages, but proof of bad character
can be admitted in mitigation of damages. For instance, in cases of defamation, the
general bad reputation of the plaintiff can be proved. Similarly, in the case of a
breach of promise to marry, the plaintiff's generally immoral character is relevant.
Likewise, in cases of seduction, evidence of the generally immoral character of the
person seduced will be.relevant.
79. Which facts need not be proved?
Ans. : The following two facts need nor be proved, viz., -
1. Facts which the parties or their agents agree to admit at the hearing or which
they are deemed to have admitted by their pleadings. The Court may, however,
require such facts also to be proved otherwise than by such admission. (S. 58)
2. Facts of which the Court will take judicial notice. (S. 56)
80. Mention any two facts of which the court must take judicial notice.
Ans. : The Courts take judicial notice of the following thirteen facts, viz., -
I. Laws in force in India.
2. Public Acts of Parliament, and local and personal Acts declared by it to be
judicially noticed.
81. What is judicial notice?
Ans. : Judicial notice is the cognisance taken by the Court itself of certain matters
which are so notorious or clearly established, that the evidence of their existence is
deemed unnecessary. S. 56 provides that no fact of which the Court will take judicial
notice need be proved, and S. 57 enumerates the facts of which the Court must take
judicial notice. The Court takes judicial notice of these facts, and in doing so, it may
B-88 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS ,
resort for aid to appropriate books or documents of reference. A party calling upon
the Court to take judicial notice of any fact must be ready to supply it with any ;
necessary book or document for reference.
82. What is meant by 'Oral Evidence'?

Ans. : Oral evidence means "all statements made before the Court by witnesses.
(S. 3)
All facts (except the contents of documents or electronic records) may be provedb~
oral evidence (S. 59) which must, in all cases, be direct, that is to say,-
if it refers to a fact which could be seen, it must be evidence of a witness wh<
says he saw it;
if it refers to a fact which could be heard, it must be evidence of a witness who
says he heard it;
if it refers to a fact which could be perceived by any other sense or in any other
manner, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he perceived it by that
sense or in that manner;
if it refers to an opinion or to the grounds on which that opinion is held, it must
be the evidence of the person who holds that opinion on those grounds.
83. What is 'Best Evidence Rule'?

Ans. : The best evidence rule means that the best evidence of which the case in its
nature is susceptible, must always be produced. It is one of the cardinal rules of the
law of evidence that the best evidence in possession of the party must always be
given, that is to say, if a fact is to be proved by oral evidence, the evidence must be
that of a person who had directly perceived the fact to which he testifies. Otherwise,
it would be impossible to test, by cross examination, the truth of the testimony; and
the law rejects the evidence which cannot adequately be tested.
84. What is 'Hearsay Evidence'?

Ans.: The word 'hearsay' is capable of various meanings and is ambiguous in the
extreme. It has at least 3 distinct meanings:
(i) Firstly, the word ' hearsay' may mean whatever a person is heard to say.
(ii) Secondly, it may mean whatever a person declares on information given by
someone else.
(iii) Thirdly, it is sometimes regarded as being synonymo us with the word

"irrelevant".
85. What are the reasons for saying that hearsay evidence is no evidence at all?
Ans. : It can be said that hearsay evidence is no evidence at all, inter a/ia, for the
following reasons.
1. It is not given on oath.
2. It cannot be tested by cross-examination.
3. In many cases, it suppresses some better testimony which, though available, is
not adduced.
4. Its admission tends to prolong trials unduly by letting in statements, the probative
value of which is very slight.
5. Its admission tends to open the door for fraud, which might be practised with
impunity.
86. Why is hearsay evidence a second hand evidence?

Ans. : It is second-ha nd evidence, not connected with personal responsibility, which
exposes a witness to all the penalties of falsehood which may be infli~ted by any of
the sanctions of truth. The person giving such evidence does not have any sense of
responsibility. If confronted with a contrary position, he always has a line of escape
by pleading that this was not his personal knowledge and that he was so informed by
somebody else.
87. What ar, the exceptions to the general rule that hearsay evidence is not
admissible?
Ans. : The following are the exceptions to the general rule that hearsay evidence is
not admissible:
( 1) A statement made outside the Court by a person who is not a witness may be a
matter in issue, or it may be part of the circumstance which it is essential to
ascertain. In such circumstances, the statement becomes admissible. For example,
a slanderous statement made by a third person and heard by the witness will be
relevant, not regarding the truth of the contents of the statement, but regarding
the fact of the statement being made.
(2) Sections 32 and 33 also lay down well-known exceptions to the general rule
that hearsay evidence is not admissible.
Thus, S. 32 deals with the cases in which a statement of a relevant fact by a

person who is dead, or who cannot be found, etc., is relevant.
Similarly, S. 33 lays down that evidence given by a witness in a judicial
proceeding is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial
proceeding, the truth of the fact which it states, when the witness is dead, or
cannot be found, etc.
(3) Under Section 6, a statement made by a person who is not a witness becomes
relevant and admissible if the statement is part of the transaction in question
(res gestae).
88. What is documentary evidence?
Ans.: Documentary evidence means all documents produced for the inspection of
the Court. (S. 3)
89. Differentiate between oral and documentary evidence.

Ans. : Oral evidence means and includes all statements which the Court requires, or
permits, to be made before it, by witnesses in relation to matters of fact under inquiry;
documentary evidence means and includes all documents produced for the inspection
of the Court.
Oral evidence is a statement of witnesses; documentary evidence is a statement of
documents. Documents are denominated as dead proof, as distingui shed from
witnesses who are said to be living proofs. Documentary evidence is superior to oral
evidence in permanence, and in many respects, in trustworthiness. There are more
ways of trying the genuineness of documentary evidence than there can be of
disproving oral evidence. In many cases, the existence of documentary evidence
excludes the production of oral evidence.
90. What is primary evidence?

Ans. : Primary evidence means that the document itselfis produced for the inspection
of the Court.
91. Write a short note on : Secondary evidence.

Ans. : Secondary evidence means and includes -
1. Certified copies given under S. 74
2. Copies made from the original, by mechanical processes , which in themselves
ensure the accuracy of the copy.
• THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT
B-91
3. Copies compared from copies made from the original by mechanical process.
4. Copies made from the original.
5. Copies compared with the original.
6. Counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not execute them.
7 • Oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has
himself seen it. (S. 63)
92. Explain the circumstances in which secondary evidence relating to documents

may be given.
Ans. : Documents must be proved by primary evidence, except in the eight cases
mentioned below.
S. 65 provides that secondary evidence of the existence, condition or contents of a
document may, however, be given in the following eight cases:
1. When the original is in the possession or power -
(a) of the person against whom the document is sought to be proved; or
(b) of any person out of reach of, or not subject to the process of the Court; or
(c) of any person legally bound to produce it, and when, after notice, such
person does not produce it.
2. When the existence, condition or contents of the original have been proved to
be admitted in writing by the person against whom it is proved or by his
representative in interest.
3. When the original has been destroyed or lost.
4. When the party offering evidence of the contents cannot (for no fault or neglect
of his) produce the original in reasonable time.
5. When the original is of such a nature as not to be easily movable (e.g. a writing
on a wall, inscription on tombstones, trees, etc.). Secondary evidence is
admissible in such cases because of the gross inconvenience and impracticability
of producing the original.
6. When the original is a public document.
7. When the original is a document of which a certified copy is permitted to be
given in evidence.
1
WITH ANSWERS 1
B-92 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS
8. When the fact to be proved is the general result or numerous accounts or other
documents which cannot conveniently be examined in Court. In such a case,
the evidence of any person skilled in the examination of such documents, and
who has examined them, is admissible.
93. Write a short note on : Rules as to notice to produce.
Ans. : S. 66 provides that secondary evidence of the contents ofthe document
referred
sing to
to in section 65 [item (l)(c) above] cannot be given, unless the party propo
ssion
give such secondary evidence has previously given to the party in whose posse
If no
or power the document is (or to his attorney or pleader), notice to produce it.
under
notice is prescribed by law, it must be such as the Court considers reasonable
the circumstances of the case.
Such notice is not required -
(i) when the Court thinks it fit to dispense with it;
(ii) when the document to be proved is itself a notice;
subject
(iii) when the person in possession of the document is out ofreach of, or not
to the process of the Court; or
(iv) when the adverse part y-
(a) had admitted the loss of the original; or
(b) has the original in Court; or
(c) has obtained possession of the original by fraud or force; or
(d) knows that he will be required to produce it.
ds.
94. Write a shor t note on : Admissibility of electronic recor
Ans. : Under the newly inserted Ss. 65A and 65B, if the four conditions
listed below
d on
are satisfied, any information contained in an electronic record which is printe
by a
paper, stored, recorded or copied in an optical or magnetic media, produced
es
computer ("computer output") is to be deemed to be a "document" - and becom
admissible in any proceedings -wit hout further proof or production of the
original,
h direct
as evidence of any contents of the original or any facts stated therein, ofwhic
evidence would be admissible.
The four conditions referred to above are:
(1) The computer output containing such information should have been
produced
to
by the computer during the period when the computer was used regularly
store or process information for the purposes of any activities regularly carried
on during that period by the person having lawful control over the use of the
computer.
(2) During such period, information of the kind contained in the electric record was
regularly fed into the computer in the ordinary course of such activities.
(3) Throughout the material part of such period, the computer must have been
operating properly. In case the computer was not properly operating during such
period, it must be shown that this did not affect the electronic record or the
accuracy of its contents.
(4) The information contained in the electronic record should be such as reproduces
or is derived from such information fed into the computer in the ordinary course
of such activities.
95. What are private documents?
Ans. : All documents are private (S. 75), except the following, which are public
documents, viz.: .
1. Documents forming the acts or records of the acts -
(i) of the sovereign authority,
(ii) of official bodies and tribunals, and
(iii) of public officers, legislative, judicial and executive, of any part of India or
of the Commonwealth or of a foreign country.
2. Public records kept in any State of private documents. (S. 74)
96. What is a public document?
Ans. : The following documents are public documents:-
1. Documents forming the acts or records of the acts -
(i) of the sovereign authority,
(ii) of official bodies and tribunals, and
(iii) ofpublic officers, legislative, judicial and executive, of any part of India or
of the Commonwealth or of a foreign country.
2. Public records kept in any State of private documents. (S. 74).
WITH ANSWER~
B-94 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS
97. How are public documents proved?

then
Ans. : The contents of public documents may be proved by the production of
certified copies. (S. 77)
party)
The word 'may' in this section denotes another mode of proof (optional to the
that the ordinary one, viz., the production of the original.
s?
98. What are the special modes of proving certain public document
Ans. : The following public documents may be proved as follows:
s,
1. Acts, orders or notifications of the Central Government in any ofits document
or of the Crown Representative or any State Government or any department of
any State Government - by the records of the departments, certified by the
heads of those departments respectively, or by any document purporting to be
n
printed by order or any such Government or, as the case may be, of the Crow
Representative.
y,
2. The proceeding ofthe Legislatures -by the journals ofthose bodies respectivel
or by published Acts or abstracts, or by copies purporting to be printed by order
to the Government concerned.
3. Proclamations, orders or regulations issued by Her Majesty or by the Privy
Council, or by any department of Her Majesty Government - by copies or
extracts contained in the London Gazette, or purporting to be printed by the
Queen's Printer.
n
4. The Acts of the Executive or the proceedings of the legislature of a foreig
country - by journals published by their authority, or commonly received in
that country as such, or by a copy certified under the seal of the country or
sovereign or recognition thereof in some Central Act.
5. The proceedings of a municipal body in a State - by a copy of such proceedings,
certified by the legal keeper thereof, or by a printed book purporting to be
published by the authority of such body.
6. Public document of any other class in a foreign country, -by the original or by
a
a copy certified by the legal keeper thereof, with a certificate under the seal of
notary public, or of an Indian Consul or diplomatic agent, that the copy is duly
certified by the officer having the legal custody of the original, and upon proof
of the character of the document according to the law of the foreign country.
99. What is presumption as regards to electronic agreements?

Ans. : S. 85A provides that the Court shall presume that every electronic record
purporting to be an agreement containing the digital signatures of the parties was so
concluded by affixing the digital signatures of the parties.
100. What is presumption as regards to electronic records and digital signatures?
Ans. : Under S. 85B, in any proceedings involving a secure electronic record, the
Court shall presume, unless the contrary is proved, that the secure electronic record
has not been altered since the specific point of time to which the secure status relates.
Until the contrary has been proved, the Court shall presume that the secure digital
signature is affixed by the subscriber with the intention of signing or approving the
electronic record.
However, except in the case of a secure electronic record or a secure digital signature,
there is no presumption regarding the authenticity and integrity of the electronic
record or any digital signature.
101. What is presumption as regards to Digital Signature Certificates?
Ans. : Under S. 85C, unless the contrary is proved, the Court shall presume that the
information listed in a Electronic Signature Certificate is correct, except for
information specified as subscriber information, which has not been verified, if the
Certificate was accepted by the subscriber.
102. What is the presumption as regards electronic messages?
Ans. : Under S. 88A, the Court may presume that an electronic message forwarded
by the originator through an electronic mail (e-mail) server to the addressee to whom
the message purports to be addressed, corresponds ~ith the message as fed into his
computer for transmission. However, the Court shall not make any presumption as
to the person by whom such message was sent.
103. What is the presumption as to electronic records which are five years old as
per S. 90-A?
Ans.: S. 90A provides that where any electronic record, purporting or proved to be
five years old, is produced from any custody which the Court considers proper in
that particular case, the Court may presume that the electronic signature which
purports to be the electronic signature of any particular person was so affixed by him
or any person authorised by him in this behalf.
104. What Is proper custody?

Ans. : Documents are said to be in proper custody if they are in the place in which,
and under the care of the person with whom, they would naturally be. However, no
custody is improper if it is proved to have had a legitimate origin, or if the
circumstances of the particular case are such as to render such an origin probable.
105. What is proper custody as regards electronic records?
It is clarified that electronic records are said to be in proper custody if they are in the
place in which, and under the care of the person with whom, they naturally would
be. However, no custody is improper if it is proved to have had a legitimate origin,
or the circumstances of the particular case are such as to render such an origin
probable.
106. Explain : Exclusion of oral by documentary evidence.
Ans. : When the terms of a contract -or of a grant or of any other disposition of
property have been reduced to the form of a document, and when any matter is
required by law to be reduced to the form of a document- no evidence (!an be given
in proofof the terms of such contract, grant, etc., except.
(i) the document itself, or
(ii) secondary evidence of its. contents, in cases in which secondary evidence is
admissible. (S. 91)
107. What is meant by probate?
Ans. : Probate means the copy ofa will certified under the seal ofa Court of competent
jurisdiction with a grant of administration to the estate of the testator. Probate of a
will is evidence of the contents of the will against all the parties interested thereunder.
Probate is secondary evidence, but it is made admissible by this section.
108. What is an ambiguous document?
Ans. : Sections 93 to 98 lays down the rules as to interpretation of documents with
the aid of extrinsic evidence. It often happens that the language used in a document
is ambiguous, and the question of the admissibility of extraneous evidence comes up
before the Court. Interpretation of a document involves the ascetainment of the
meaning of a document. The most general rule on this point is that of Lord Eldon,
;ho once said, "Generally speaking, you must construct an instrument by what is
found within the four comers." Of course, this rule is subject to several qualifications,
depending on the facts and circumstances of each case.
109. What Is meant by 1Patent' and 1Latent' ambiguity?

Ans. : Ambiguities in documents are said to be either patent or latent,
the fonner
arising where the instrument, on its face, is unintelligible, as where the
name of a
legatee is left wholly blank in a will. Latent ambiguity, on the other
hand, arises
where the words of the instrument are clear, but their application to the circu
mstances
is doubtful, as where a legacy is given to "my niece Jane" and the testa
tor has two
nieces of that name. Section 93 embodies the rule with regard to paten
t ambiguity
and Ss. 95-97 relate to latent ambiguity.
In other words,patent ambiguity must be understood as an ambiguity whic
h is inherent
in the words and is incapable of being dispelled, either by any legal
rules or by
applying a known, conventional meaning. A latent ambiguity, on the other
hand, is
not ambiguity in the language, but in the relation ofthe language used to
the existing
facts.
110. Elaborate fully : Burden of proof.
Ans. : The phrase "burden of proof' has two distinct (and frequently
confused)
meanings:
(i) The burden of proof as a matter oflaw and pleading, the burden, as it
has been
called, ofestablishing a case. This burden rests upon the party, whether plain
tiff
or defendant, who substantially ass·erts tpe affrrmative ofthe issue. It is fixed
, at
the beginning of the trial, by the statements of the pleadings, and it is settle
d as
a question of law, remaining unchanged under any circumstances what
ever.
This rule is embodied in Section 101.
(ii) The burden of proof as matter ofadducing evidence - The burden of
proof in
this sense is always unstable, and may shift constantly throughout the trial.
This
aspect of the burden of proof is contained in Section 102. It lies at first
on the
party who would be unsuccessful if no evidence at all was given on eithe
r side.
This being the test, the burden of proof cannot remain constant, but must
shift
as soon as he produces evidence which prima/acie gives rise to a presumptio
n
in his favour. It may again shift back on him, if rebutting evidence is produ
ced
by his opponent. This being the position, the question as to the onus ofthe
proo f
is only a rule for deciding on whom the obligation rests of going further
if he
wishes to win.
111. On whom does the burden of proof lie?
Ans. : When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said
that the
burden ofproof lies on that person.
112. On whom Is the burden of proving that a person Is alive?

Ans. : The burden of proving that a person is alive who has not been heard offor 7
years, by those who would naturally have heard of him, lies on the person who
affinns that he is alive. (S. 101)
If a person has not been heard of for seven years, there is a presumption of law that
he is dead, and the burden of proving that he is alive is shifted to the other side. But
at what time within that time he died is not a matter of presumption, but of evidence,
and the onus of proving that the death took place at any particular time within the
seven years lies upon the person who claims a right to the establishment of which
that fact is essential. There is no presumption that he died at the end of the first seven
years or at any particular date or at any subsequent period.
113. Birth during marriage is conclusive proof of legitimacy. Explain.
Ans. : The fact that any person was born -
(1) during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man,
or
(2) within two hundred and eight days after its dissolution (the mother remaining
unmarried), is conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son ofthat man, unless
it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at
any time when he could have been begotten.
Evidence that a child is born during wedlock is sufficient to establish its legitimacy,
and shifts the burden of proof to the party seeking to establish the contrary.
114. Which are the sections in the Act which deal with conclusive proof?
Ans. : Sections 41, 112 and 113 are the only sections which deal with matters which
are to be regarded as "conclusive proof'. No rule of the kind can be based on
considerations of evidence, because enquiry is altogether excluded.
115. What is the presumption as to dowry death?
Ans. : Under S. 113-B, when the question is whether a person has committed the
dowry death of a woman, and it is shown that, soon before her death she had been
subjected by that person to cruelty or harassment in connection with any demand for
dowry, the Court shall presume that such a person had caused the dowry death.
(The term "dowry death" has the same meaning as in S. 504-B of the Indian Penal
Code.)
-
t THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT B-99
t S. 113-B raises a presumption ofguilt against any person who has been proved to
t have subjected the deceased woman, soon before her death, to cruelty or harassment,
in connection with dowry. Needless to state, it is a presumption intended to be raised
t against the husband and his relatives in the case of dowry deaths, which have become
•
t
increasingly common in India.
116. What is presumption of fact?
Ans.: Presumptions of fact are nothing more than logical inferences of the existence
- of one fact drawn from some other known or proved facts. Such presumptions are
always rebuttable.
- 117. What are the differences between Presumptions of law and Presumptions of
Fact?
> Ans.:
Presumptions of Law Presumpti.ons ofFact
1. Presumptions of law derive their 1. Presumptions of fact derive their
force from law. force from logic.
2. A presumption of law applies to -a 2. A presumption of fact applies to
class ofcases. individual cases.
3. Presumptions oflaw are to be drawn 3. In England, presumptions of fact are
by the Court. to be drawn by the jury.
118. When may a Court presume a fact?

Ans. : The Court may presume -
(a) That a man who is in possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is either the
thief or has received the goods lmowing them to be stolen, unless be can account
for his possession.
(b) That an accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborated in material
particulars.
~ 119. Define Estoppel.
Ans. : When a person has - by his
(i) declaration, (ii) act, or (iii) omission
intentionally caused or permitted another person

(i) to believe a thing to be true, and
(ii) to act upon such belief-
neither he nor his representative can be allowed to deny the truth of that thing in a
suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representative.
120. State the conditions to be satisfied to bring a case within the scope of estoppel
as per S. 115.
Ans. : The following eight conditions must be satisfied to bring a case within the
scope of estoppel, as defined in S. 115:
(i) There must have been a representation by a person (or his authorised agent) to
another person. Such a representation may be in any form - a declaration or an
act or an omission.
(ii) Such representation must have been of the existence of a fact, and not of future
promises or intention.
(iii) The representation must have been meant to have been relied upon.
(iv) There must have been belief on the part of the other party in its truth.
(v) There must have been some action on the faith ofthat declaration, act or omission.
In other words, such declaration, act or omission must have actually caused the
other person to act on the faith of it, and to alter his position to his prejudice or
detriment.
(vi) The misrepresentation or conduct or omission must have been the proximate
cause of leading the other party to act to his prejudice.
(vii) The person claiming the benefit of an estoppel must show that he was not aware
of the true state of things. There can be no estoppel if such a person was aware
of the true state of affairs or if he had means of such knowledge.
(viii) Only the person to whom the representation was made or for whom it was
designed (or his representative) can avail of the doctrine.
121. What are the different types of Estoppel?
Ans.: Estoppels are of seven kinds: 1. Estoppel by record; 2. Estoppel by deed; 3.
Estoppel by conduct; 4. Equitable estoppel; 5. Estoppel by negligence; 6. Estoppel
on benami transactions; and 7. Estoppel on a point of law.
B-101
122. Explain Estoppal by record.

Ans. : Under this kind of estoppel, a person is not pennitted to dispute
the facts upon
which a judgment against him is based. It is dealt with by (i) Ss. 11 to
14 of the Code
of Civil Procedure, and (ii) Ss. 40 to 44 of the Indian Evidence Act.
123. Explain Estoppal by deed.
Ans. : Under this kind of estoppel, where a party has entered into a solem
n engagement
by deed as to certain facts, neither he, nor any one claiming through
or under him, is
permitted to deny such facts.
124. Explain Estoppal by conduct.
Ans. : Estoppel by conduct, sometimes called estoppel in pais, may
arise from
agreement or misrepresentation. Estoppel in pais is dealt with in Ss.
115 to 117.
If a man, either by words or by conduct, has intimated that he cons
ents to an act
which has been done, and that he will not offer any opposition to it, altho
ugh it could
not have been lawfully done without his consent, and he thereby
induces others to do
that from which they otherwise might have abstained from doing, he cann
ot question
the legality of the act to the prejudice of those who have so given faith
to his words,
or to the fair inference to be drawn from his conduct.
If a party has an interest to prevent an act being done, and acquiesce
s in it, so as to
induce a reasonable belief that he consents to it, and the position of other
s is altered
by their giving credit to his sincerity, he has no right to challenge the
act to their
prejudice.
125. Wha t is meant by Equitable Estoppel?
Ans.: The Evidence Act is not exhaustive of the rules of estoppel. Thus
, although S.
116 only deals with estoppel that arises against a tenant or licensee, a simil
ar estoppel
has been held to arise against a mortgagee, an executor, a legatee, a
trustee, or an
assignee of property, precluding him from denying the title of the mort
gagor, the
testator, the author of the trust, or the assignor, as the case may be. Furth
er, S. 116 is
not exhaustive of all instances of estoppel as between landlord
and tenant. Thus,
there are cases of estoppel which, though not within the tenns of Ss.
115 to 117 of
the Evidence Act, are recognised instances of estoppel. Estoppels
which are not
covered by the Evidence Act may be tenned equitable estoppels.
126. Explain Estoppel by Negligence.

Ans. : This type of estoppel enables a party, as against some other party, to claim a
right of property which in fact he does not possess. Such estoppel is described as
estoppel by negligence or by conduct or representation or by a holding out of
ostensible authority. Such estoppel is based on the existence of a duty which the
person estopped is owing to the person led into the wrong belief or to the general
public of whom the person is one.
127. Explain Estoppel on benami transactions.
Ans. : If the owner of property clothes a third person with the apparent ownership
and a right of disposition thereof, not merely by transferring it to him, but also by
acknowledging that the transferee has paid him the consideration for it, he is estopped
from asserting his title as against a person to whom such third party has disposed of
the property and who has taken it in good faith and for value.
128. Explain Estoppel on a point of law.
Ans.: Estoppel refers to a belief in a fact, and.not in a proposition of law. A person
cannot be estopped for a misrepresentation on a point of law. An admission on a
point of law is not an admission of a "thing" so as to make the admission matter of
estoppel. Where persons merely represent their conclusions of law as to the validity
of an assumed or admitted adoption, there is no representation of a fact to constitute
an estoppel.
129. State the differences between Estoppel and Admission.
Ans. : Differences between Estoppel and Admission
1. An admission may, under certain circumstances, bind strangers as well, whereas
estoppel binds only parties and privies thereto. It cannot be taken advantage of
by strangers.
2. Estoppel being a rule of evidence, an action cannot be founded on it, whereas
an action may be founded on an admission.
3. An admission of a party is strong evidence against him, but he is at liberty to
prove that such admission was mistaken or untrue. But, if another person has
been induced by it to alter his position, the party is estopped from disputing its
truth with respect to that person. When an admission has been acted upon by
another person, the admission is an estoppel, and the estopped party is required
to make good his representation; in other words, the admission is conclusive.
THE INDI AN EVIDENCE ACT
B-103
An estoppel differs from an admission in that

it cannot be taken advantage of
by strangers. It binds only the parties and priv
ies. An estoppel is only a rule of
evid enc e, for an action can not be founded upo
n it.
130 . Wh o ma y testify as a witness in
a Court of law?
Ans. : All per s~n s are competent to testify, unle
ss the Court considers that, by reason
of ten der age , ext rem e old age , dise ase
, or infirmity, the y are inca pab le of
understanding the questions put to them and of
giving rational answers. Even a lunatic
is com pet ent to test ify, pro vid edh e is not prev
ented by his lunacy from understanding
the que stio ns put to him and giving rational
answers to them.
Hus ban ds and wiv es are, in all civil and crim
inal cases, competent witnesses against
eac h other, sub ject to the qualification that
communications between the spouses
ma de dur ing mar riag e are protected from disc
losure.
In all civ il pro cee din gs, the parties to the suit
are competent witnesses. Therefore, a
party to a suit can call as his witness any of the
defendants to the suit. And although
an acc use d per son is incompetent to testify in
proceedings in which he is an accused,
an acc om plic e is a com pete nt witness against
an accused person.
131 . Exp lain "Du mb Witness".
Ans. : A witn ess who is unable to spe ak may give
evidenc e in any manner in which
he can ma ke it intelligible, e.g. , by writing or
by signs in open Court. Such evidence
sha ll be dee med to be ora l evidence.
A wit nes s wh o has take n a religious vow
of silence is deemed to be "unable to
spe ak" , and he ma y give his evidence in wri
ting -to questions put to him. When a
dea f-m ute witness is to be examined, the Court
has to ascertain, before he is examined,
tha t he has the necessary amount of intelligenc
e and that he understands the nature
of the oat h and of the questions put to him.
.132 _ Wh en is a child competent witness?

Ans. : A chi ld is a competent witness, unless he
is unable to understand the questions
· una ble to give rational answers. There
is no provision in India by which
or is b t· of the evidence of a child is
cor ro ora 10n required . The child's evidence is made
•
admiSSl'ble, w het her corroborated or not. Once there is admissible evidence, a Court
. .
can act upo n 1·t·, corroboration' unless reqm
.
red by statute, goe s only to the wezght and
.
. · 'd
val ue o f ev1 e nee It is a sou nd rule m practice not to act on the uncorroborated
.
.
evi den ce of a child' but this is a rule ofpru dence, and not of law.
133. Who is an accomplice?

Ans. : An accomplice is a person who has concurred in the commission of an offence.
The term 'accomplice' signifies a guilty associate in a crime or a partner in a crime
who makes admission of facts showing that he had a conscious hand in the offence.
The term 'accomplice' includes both the principals and the abettors.
134. Who is not an accomplice?
Ans. : The following classes of persons are not accomplices:
(1) When a person, under threat of death or other form of pressure which he is
unable to resist, commits a crime along with others, he is not a willingparticipant
in it, but a victim of such circumstances. (Srinivas Mall v. Emperor, (1977) 49
Born. L.R. 688, P.C.)
(2) So also, a person who merely witnesses a crime, and does not give information
of it to anyone else out of fear, is not an accomplice.
(3) betectives, paid informers and trap witnesses are not accomplices. As the learned
author Wigmore observes, when the witness has made himself an agent for the
prosecution before associating with the wrongdoers, or before the actual
perpetration of the offence, he is not an accomplice.
135. Why accomplice evidence is untrustworthy?
Ans. : Accomplice evidence is untrustworthy for the following three reasons :
(1) An accomplice is likely to swear falsely in order to shift the guilt from himself.
(2) As a participator in crime, he is likely to disregard the sanction of an oath.
(3) He gives evidence under a promise of a pardon or in the expectation of implied
pardon, ifhe discloses all he knows against those with whom he acted criminally;
and this hope would lead him to favour the prosecution.
136. Write a short note on : Privileged communication made during marriage.

Ans. : No person who, is or has been, married can be compelled to disclose any
communication made to him during marriage by the person to whom he is or has·
been married. (S. 122)
S. 122 applies only to communi-cations made during a valid marriage and the rule
also applies after a marriage has been dissolved or after one of the parties has died.
A communication between husband and wife, which has been heard or seen by a
third person may be proved by the latter because the section only refers to the parties
to the marriage.
B-105
137. What are Privileged Communications?

Ans. : The Indian Evidenc A t . .
. e
from d1sc1osure : (1) Matr· c mentions three kinds of communications as privileged
. . .
d( )p . imomal commumcat1ons; (2) Official communications·
an 3 rofess1onal communications. '
138. What are Matrimonial Communications?
~ns. : ~ person cannot be compelled to disclose any communication made ro him or
~r during marriage by any person to whom he or she is or has been married· nor
will such c · · . . '
. ommunicatton be permitted to be disclosed except in the following three
cases, vzz.,: -
(i) if the person who made it, or his or her representative in interest, consents; or
(ii) in suits between married persons; or
(iii) in proceedings in which one married person is prosecuted for any crime
committed against the other. (S. 122)
139. What is Professional Communication?
Ans. : A professional communication means a confidential communication between
a professional legal adviser and his client made to_the former in the course, and for
the purpose, ofhis employment as such advisor. The privilege attaching to confidential
professional 4isclosures is col)fined to the case of legal advisers, and does not protect
those made to clergym~n, doctors,_etc. A professional legal adviser means a barrister,
attorney, pleader or vakil. A client cannot be compelled, and a legal adviser cannot
be allowed, without the express consent of his client, to disclose the oral or
documentary communications passing between them in professional confidence (S.
126). Similarly, an interpreter, clerk or servant of such legal adviser cannot disclose
such communication. (S. 127)
140. Examination of witnesses is regulated by whom?
Ans.: The order of production and examination of witnesses is regulated (a) by the
law and practice relating to civil and criminal procedure, and in the absence thereof,
(b) by the discretion of the Court.
141. Who decides as to admissibility of evidence? .
Ans. : When either party proposes to give evidence of any fact, the Judg~ may ask
· g to give the evidence in what manner the alleged fact, 1f proved,
the party propos1n
would be relevant. The Judge shall admit the evidence if he thinks that the fact, if
proved, would be relevant, and not otherwise.
If the fact proposed to be proved is one of which evidence is admissible only upon
proof of some other fact, such last-mentioned fact must be proved before evidence is
given of the fact first mentioned, unless the party undertakes to give proof of such
fact and the Court is satisfied with such undertaking.
142. What is examination-in-chief?

Ans. : The examination of a witness by the party who calls him is called his
examination-in-chief
143. What is a leading question?

Ans. : A 'leading question' is one which suggests to the witness the answer which it
is desired he should give. But, if it merely suggests a subject without suggesting an
answer or a specific thing, it is not a leading question.
Any question suggesting the answer which the person putting it wishes or expects to
receive is called a leading questions,
144. When leading questions cannot be asked?

Ans. : Leading questions cannot ordinarily be asked in examination-in- chief or re-
examination. The witness is presumed to be biased in favour of the party examining
him and might thus be prompted. The reason for excluding leading questions is
quite obvious; it would enable a party to prepare his story and evolve it in his very
words from the mouth of his witness in Court. It would tend to diminish chances of
detection of a concocted story. If a witness is allowed to give his narrative in his own
words, he is likely, if the story is made up, to leave some loop-holes, to which the
cross-examiner will scarcely fail to direct his attack.
145. When leading questions can be asked?

Ans. : Leading questions can, only be asked when they refer to matters, which are '
(1) introductory; (2) undisputed; or (3) sufficiently proved. For, if such questions
were not allowed, the examination would be most inconveniently protracted.
Leading questions can, however, be asked in cross-examination. This is so, because
the very purpose of a cross-examination is to test the accuracy, credibility and general
reliability of the witness. The learned author, Best, gives two main reasons why
leading questions are not allowed in examination-in-chief, but are to be freely allowed
B-107
in cross- examination. Firstly, one can generally suppose that a witness in bias_ed in
favour of the party who brings him and is hostile to the opponent. Secondly, the party
calling the witness has a distinct advantage, in that he knows before-hand what the
witness will try to prove, and if he could ask leading questions to his own witness, he
could extract from the witness only as such as would be favourable to him.
146. What is cross examination?
Ans. : The examination of a witness by the adverse party is called his cross-
examination.
After a party examines his witness, his opponent has a right to cross-examine him. A
cross-examination follows upon the examination-in-chief, unless the Court, for some
reason, postpones it. The essence of cross- examination is that it is the interrogation
by one party of witness called by his adversary with the object either to obtain from
such witness an admission favourable to his cause or to discredit him.
147. Why is cross-examination done? .
Ans. : The idea behind cross-examination is two-fold: to weaken, qualify or destroy
the case of the opponent, and to establish a party's own cause by means of his
opponent's weakness. The main objects of cross-examination are to measure the
accuracy, credibility and general value of the evidence given in chief, so as to sift the
facts already stated by the witness, to detect and to expose the discrepancy, and to
elicit suppressed facts which will support the case of the party who cross-examines
the witness.
148. What questions can be asked in a cross-examination?
Ans. : When a witness .is cross-examined, he may be asked any question which
tends-
1. to test his veracity; or
2. to discover who he is, and what is his position in life; or
3. to shake his credit, by injuring his character, although the answer to such
questions might tend directly or indirectly to criminate him or might expose, or
tend directly or indirectly to expose him to a penalty or forfeiture. (S. 146)
In a cross-examination, a witness may be asked questions not only regarding the
facts in issue or directly relevant to them, but also regarding the following:
B-108 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION S & DESCRIPTI VE QUESTION S WITH ANSWERS
(a) Questions tending to test the witness, means of knowledge, opportunities of

observation, reasons for recollection and belief, and powers of memory,
perception and judgment.
(b) Questions tending to expose the errors, omissions, contradictions and
improbabilities in his testimony.
It may also be noted that -
(i) leading questions may be put in a cross-examination;
(ii) the questions in cross-examination need not be limited to the matters upon which
the witness has already been examined-in- chief, but they may be extended to
the whole case;
(iii) the Court may, in its discretion, pennit the person who calls a witness to cross-
examine him under some circumstances.
149. How can one impeach the credit of a witness?
Ans. : The credit of a witness may be impeached in the following three ways by the
adverse party (or, with the consent of the Court, by the party who calls him):
1. By the evidence of persons who testify that they, from their knowledge of the
witness, believe him to be unworthy ofcredit.
2. By proof that the witness has been bribed, or has accepted the offer of a bribe,
or has received any other corrupt inducement to give his evidence.
3. By proof of a former statement inconsistent with any part of his evidence which
is liable to be contradicted.
150. Write a short note on : Scandalous questions.
Ans. : The Court may also forbid any question or inquiries which it regards as indecent
or scandalous, although such questions or inquiries may have some bearing on the
questions before the Court, unless they relate to facts in issue or to matters necessary
to be known in order to detennine whether or not the facts in issue existed. (S. 151)
Likewise, the Court must forbid any question which appears to it to be intended to
insult or annoy, or which though proper in itself, appears to the Court needlessly
offensive in fonn. (S. ~ 52)
The controversy regarding indecent and scandalous questions often arises in cases
of sexual offences, adultery, desertion and legitimacy. Thus, courts have often
remarked that the purpose of cross-examining a victim of rape is to get to the truth of
the matter, and not to humiliate her or cause her any embarrassment or discomfiture.
THE INDIAN EVID ENC E ACT
B-109
151. Who is a hostile witness?

Ans. : A "hostile witness" is one who, from the man
ner in which he gives evidence,
sho ws that he is not desirous of telling the trut
h to the Court. A witness who is
gain ed ove r by the opposite party is a hostile witn
ess. The mere fact that at a Sessions
trial, a witness tells a different story from that told
by him before the Magistrate does
not necessarily make him hostile.
152. Wh at is re-examination?
Ans. : The examination of a witness subsequent
to the cross- examination (by the
par ty who called him), is called his re-examinat
ion.
Re- exa min atio n is to be directed to the explana
tion of matters referred to in cross-
examination; and if new matter is, by permissio
n of the Cou rt, introduced in re-
exa min atio n, the adverse party may further cros
s-examine the witness upo n that
matter.
153. Can the leading questions be asked

in re examination?
Ans. : Lea ding questions mus t not be asked in re-e
xamination, if objected to by the
adv erse party, except with the permission of the
Court. The Cou rt mus t perm it the
ask ing of lead ing questions as to matters -
(i) whi ch are introductory or undisputed, or
(ii) whi ch hav e bee n already sufficiently proved
in the opin ion of the Court.
154 . Wh at is refreshing memory?
Ans. : A witness m~y refresh his memory by referrin
g to -
(1) any wri ting mad e by him self
(i) at the tim e of the transaction concerning whi
ch he is questioned; or
(ii) so soo n afterwards that the transaction was
fres h in his ·memory;
(2) any suc h wri ting mad e by another person,
and read by the witness and kno wn
by him to be correct, whi le his memory was still
fresh;
(3) pro fess iona l treatises, if he is an expert.
155 . Wri te a short note on : Rules as to not

ice to produce documents.
Ans. : The Cou rt may -
(a) Insp ect the doc ume nt, unless it refers to mat
ters of Stat e.
(b) Tak e othe r evid enc e -
(c) Direct the translator to keep the contents secret, .unless the document is to be
given in evidence.
156. Write a short note on : Judge's power to put questions or order productior
Ans. : In order to discover or to obtain proper proof of relevant facts, the judg1
may-
(a) ask any question
(i) to any party, or witness, (ii) in any form,
(iii) at any time, (iv) about any fact (relevant or irrelevant); or
(b) order the production of any document or thing.
Neither the parties nor their agents are entitled-
(i) to make any objection to any such question or order; or
(ii) without the leave of the Court, to cross-examine any witness upon an)
answer given in reply to any such question.
157. Which questions cannot be asked by the judge?

Ans. : The Judge cannot -
(a) ask any question which it would be improper for any other person to ask under
section 148 or 149; or
(b) compel a witness to answer any question, which he would be entitled to refuse
to answer if asked by the adverse party under section 121 to 129; or
(c) compel any witness to produce any document which he would be entitled to
refuse to produce, if called for by the adverse party under section 130; or
(d) dispense with primary evidence of any document, except in the cases excepted.
158. When can a judge put questions to a witness?

An~. : The fate of the proceedings cannot be left in the hands of the parties, as
crimes are public wrongs which affect the whole community and are harmful to 1
society in general.
As observed by the Supreme Court, it is the duty of the Judge to discover the truth,
and for this purpose, he can ask any question in any form at any time, whether to any
witness or any of the parties, about any fact which is relevant, or even irrelevant.

Descriptive Questions With Answers: 1. To Which Proceedings Is The Indian Evidence Act Applicable?

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Descriptive Questions With Answers: 1. To Which Proceedings Is The Indian Evidence Act Applicable?

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Descriptive Questions With Answers: 1. To Which Proceedings Is The Indian Evidence Act Applicable?

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

B-84 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS

Ii Descriptive Questions with Answers l

2. To which proceedings Is the Indian Evidence Act not applicable?

knowledge. Normally, contempt proceedings are decided on the basis of affidavits.

4. What Is the principle aim of Arbitration?

5. Why are arbitrators excluded from the ambit of the Act?

5. Judgments in other cases : Ss. 40-44.

10. What Is meant by 'Fact In Issue'?

Relevant Fact Fact in issue

12. Define 'Document'?

15. Distinguish between Direct and Circumstantial Evidence.

24. Differentiate between "Presumption of Law' and 'Presumption

25. What is "Conclusive Proof"?

26. What is 'Relevant Fact'.

27. Of what fact may evidence be given?

28. When can Evidence be given of fact is issue?

29. When do facts not otherwise relevant become relevant?

30. What is res gestae?

31. State the instances of "res gestae'

32. What is motive and preparation?

34. What is previous or subsequent conduct?

(ii) A destroyed or concealed evidence;

36. What is common intention?

as against each of the persons believed to be so conspiring, as

38. Define admission.

39. Explain 'Admission'.

40. What are the different types of 'Admissions'?

45. Define and explain 'Confession'.

46. What is 'Retracted Confession'?

B-78 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS

48. What are 'Extra Judicial Confessions'?

a~ a matter of caution, Courts require some material corroboration to such a

49. Distinguish between Confession and Admission.

not admissible as a confession may yet, for other purposes, be admissible as an

50. When are the Confessions irrelevant?

53. What is Confession by Police?

54. What is meant by Confession not made before a Magistrate?

55. When are the confessions relevant?

56. What Is Confession made after removal of threat, Inducement or promise?

57. What is meant by Confession made under promise, deception?

58. What is confession leading to discovery of fact?

(I) if and when certain facts are deposed to as discovered in consequence of

60. What is a dying declaration?

61. On which grounds the dying declaration are admitted?

62. What is the method of proving dying declaration?

63. What is the evidential value of a dying declaration?

B-84 MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS & DESCRIPTIVE QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS

3. A dying declaration is also not sub- 3. A deposition is subject to cross-

69. When are entries in books of account relevant?

70. Distinguish between Judgments in personam and Judgments in rem.

71. When are opinions of third person relevant?

72. Who is an expert?

73. When Is the opinion of an expert relevant?

74. When is the opinion of a handwriting expert relevant?

75. How Foreign law may be proved?

77 • When is the character of a person Irrelevant in civil and criminal cases?

82. What is meant by 'Oral Evidence'?

83. What is 'Best Evidence Rule'?

84. What is 'Hearsay Evidence'?