Circumstantial evidence indian evidence act. SUMMARY OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 2019-02-23

Types of Evidences under Indian Evidence Act, 1872

The law changed the face of Indian law as before introducing it, the law was based on caste, community, and religion and after the enforcement, and it proved that law is equal for everyone in the country. If the evidence of witness before whom confession made was unreliable and his conduct also doubtful and there is no other circumstance to connect accused with crime, conviction based solely on retracted extra-judicial confession is not proper and the accused is entitled to acquittal; Shakhram Shankar Bansode v. These are, however, matters which the Court may legitimately take into consideration. A must prove the admission. State of Tamil Nadu, 1997 1 Crimes 515 Mad. For example — assume a person who is looking out from his door and is seeing a person killing someone else. Where a case hangs on the evidence of a single eye witness it may be enough to sustain the conviction given sterling testimony of a competent, honest man although as a rule of prudence courts call for corroboration.

Know Some Important Features of the Indian Evidence Act

Besides this Advocates of both the parties. The evidence is any matter of fact that a party to the lawsuit offers to prove or disprove on a particular issue in a particular case. He produced a pistol from his house which indicated that he could have alone have known of its existence there. It is evidence that occupies a secondary position. A statement of the price, made by a deceased banya in the ordinary course of his business is a relevant fact. The Court may direct any person present in Court to write any words or figures for the purpose of enabling the Court to compare the words or figures so written with any words or figures alleged to have been written by such person. The motive is a very essential factor to be seen behind every act,specially a criminal act committed.

If case is based solely on circumstantial evidence it needs to be foolproof

In this sense it is distinguished from circumstantial evidence, which seeks to prove an act or matter, by testimony, not that any person directly perceived the act or matter, but that he perceived other things which would render the main factor matter probable. A may prove these facts for the reasons stated in the last proceeding illustration. But where there is no secondary evidence as contemplated by Section 66 of the Evidence Act then the document cannot be said to have been proved either by primary evidence or by secondary evidence. Primary evidence — Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court. When they must not be asked — Leading questions must not, if objected to by the adverse party, be asked in an examination-in-chief, or in re-examination, except with the permission of the Court. This may be a reasonable ground for asking him if he is a dakait.

Circumstantial Evidence in India

Evidence may be given to show which he meant to sell. The court will not then insist on corroboration by any other eye witness particularly as the incident might have occurred at a time or place when there was no possibility of any other eye witness being present. It had noting to do with carrying the conspiracy into effect; Mirza Akbar v. A hires lodgings of B for a year, and a regularly stamped agreement, drawn up by an attorney, is made between them. Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts to neither of which the whole correctly applies — When the language used applies partly to one set of existing facts and, partly to another set of existing facts, but the whole of it does not apply correctly to either, evidence may be given to show to which of the two it was meant to apply. The investigation further revealed that the accused who had consumed alcohol on the day of the incident, saw the victim girl proceeding alone on the road. If, however, the evidence of eye witnesses is credit-worthy and is believed by the court which has placed implicit reliance on them, the question whether there is any motive or not becomes wholly irrelevant; Raja v.

What is the difference between Direct Evidence and Circumstantial Evidence?

Nowadays, circumstantial evidence is more often given more importance than direct evidence, because more often in criminal law, direct evidence is misused and justice gets impaired. If these conditions are fulfilled, circumstantial evidence may approximate to truth and be preferred to direct evidence. It must stand on its own legs. For example, A was indicted for murdering В by poisoning him. Entire evidence of hostile witness does not get excluded or rendered unworthy of consideration. Power of jury or assessors to put questions — In cases tried by jury or with assessors, the jury or assessors may put any question to the witnesses, through or by leave of the Judge, which the judge himself might put and which he considers proper. Oral evidence is offered of the payment.

What is the difference between Direct Evidence and Circumstantial Evidence?

Confession by accused while in custody of police not to be proved against him — No confession made by any person whilst he is in the custody of a police-officer, unless it be made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate 1, shall be proved as against such person. All kinds of persons are free to bring thier disputes to the court and seek a fair judgement. The general trend of the confession is substantiated by some evidence, tallying with the particulars of confession for conviction of the accused; Madi Ganga v. Further the proved circumstances must be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and totally inconsistent with his innocence. Such statements are relevant whether the person who made them was or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE:

State of Karnataka, 1997 3 Supreme Today 63. But non-confessional part of the F. There was a dire necessary for the codification of the rules of law evidence. They are: 1 the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. All the statements which are permitted by the court or the court expects the witness to make such statements in his presence regarding the truth of the facts, are called as Oral Evidences. Estoppel — When one person has by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representative, to deny the truth of that thing. By suitor in representative character — Statements made by parties to suits suing or sued in a representative character, are not admissions, unless they were made while the party making them held that character.

Types of Evidences under Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Motive is the reason or ground of an action. Where a conviction is sought upon circumstantial evidence alone the defendant cannot be convicted unless the state has proven beyond reasonable doubt, by facts and circumstances, all of which are consistent with each other and with his guilt, and Inconsistent with any reasonable theory of innocence. Ordinarily it is a safe and sound rule of appreciation of evidence to accept the testimony of an independent witness provided it is in consonance with probabilities. The fact is irrelevant as between B and C. Motive for communication of murder stands proven. Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, the truth of facts therein stated — Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorized by law to take it is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a letter stage of the same judicial proceedings, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept our of the way by the adverse party or if his presence cannot be obtained without, an amount of delay of expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable; Provided — That the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest; That the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross examine; That the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding. Statements of witnesses and documentary evidence and facts for the examination by the court are also Judicial Evidence.

Know Some Important Features of the Indian Evidence Act

Natural witness Witnesses being close relations of deceased living opposite to house of deceased, are natural witnesses to be believed; Om Parkash v. The Mohammendan law givers deals with evidence under the heads of oral and documentary. An eye witness must be competent legally fit and qualified to testify in court. The bench said that the trial court opined that though the prosecution has successfully established the death of the deceased, it had failed to connect the accused by giving cogent and convincing evidence in respect of the last-seen theory and also the motive of the accused. B wishes to prove, by secondary evidence, the contents of a lost document.

Concept and Historical Background of Evidence

See also the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Act 2 of 1974 , sections 295 and 297. These aspects were highlighted in State of Rajasthan v. The fact that, soon after the commission of the crime, A absconded from his house, is relevant under section 8, as a conduct subsequent to and affected by facts in issue. State of Uttar Pradesh, 1997 1 Crimes 500 All. Evidence of incidents took place sometime ago are relevant. State Of Uttar Pradesh, the accused was tried for the murder of the deceased by shooting him with a country made pistol.