The Indian Evidence Act Questions 101 to 120 (3 Marks)

Q101. What is “Fact in Issue”?

Section 3, Interpretation Clause of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 defines this term.

The expression “facts in issue” means and includes— any fact from which, either by itself or in connection with other facts, the existence, non-existence, nature, or extent of any right, liability, or disability, asserted or denied in any suit or proceeding, necessarily follows.

‘Fact in issue’ are those facts, which are alleged by one party and denied by other parties in the pleading in a civil case or alleged by the prosecution and denied by the accused in a criminal case. A fact in issue is called the “principal fact” or factum probandum

Essentials or elements of “Fact in issue”?

It is the fact of dispute between the parties; and
It should touch the question of rights and liabilities of parties in the dispute.

Q102. Explain “May Presume, Shall Presume and Conclusive Proof”

Section 4 of the Evidence Act, 1872 define these terms.

“May presume”—Whenever it is provided by this Act that the Court may presume a fact, it may either regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved, or may call for proof of it.
“Shall presume”—Whenever it is directed by this Act that the Court shall presume a fact, it shall regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved.
“Conclusive proof”—When one fact is declared by this Act to be conclusive proof of another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it.

Q103. Why the Evidence Act is deemed as “Lex Fori”?

“Lex Fori” means the law of the country in which an action is brought. The Evidence Act is “Lex Fori”. It means evidence is one of those matters which are governed by the law of the country in which the proceedings take place (lex fori) . Evidence is means of proof. Proof is the effect of evidence.

All questions relating to the admission or rejection of evidence shall be determined by the law of the country where the question arises, where the remedy is sought to be enforced and where the court sits to enforce it. Where evidence is taken in one country in aid of a suit or action in another country, either on ordinary commission or with assistance of local courts, the law applicable to the recording of the evidence would be the law prevailing in the country where the proceeding is going on. For example, A lends money to B in England. they enter into a contract according to the English law. A brings an action against B in a court in India. A tenders evidence to prove his debt which is admissible under the law of England but is inadmissible under the law of india. The evidence is admissible so it cannot be adduced.

Q104. Explain Dying declaration.

“A dying declaration is a declaration written or verbal made by a person, as to the cause of his death or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction, which resulted in his death”. Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act refers to a statement made by a person who is dead or cannot be found etc. Generally, hearsay evidence are not admissible but statement made by a person who is dead or cannot be found etc. is admissible as exception under Section 21(1).

The evidentiary value of dying declaration will vary according to the circumstances of a particular case in which it is made. Dying Declaration is evidence but it is a weak piece of evidence. It is to be corroborated by other evidence. Such valuation of Dying Declaration depends upon many things as under

State of mind of declarant.
State of the body of declarant.
To whom the Declaration/Statement is made.
Who recorded the statement?
Whether the statement is recorded in the same language and in a same word of the declarant.

Essential conditions of dying declaration are as follows:

It must be a statement, written or verbal
The person making statement must have died.
The statement relate to the cause of his death or the circumstances of the transaction which related in his death and not the cause of the death of someone else.
The cause of the person’s death must be in question.
The person making statement must be in a fit condition to make the statement.
The statement must be competent
Declaration must be competent

Q105. State the difference between admission and confession.

*Admission*	*Confession*
It is made in generally in civil cases.	It is made in criminal cases only.
It is genus, which means all admission does not includes confession.	It is species, meant every confession includes admission.
Additional evidence is required to prove the guilt.	The guilt can be proved on the basis of confessional statement.
It is not regarded as Conclusive proof u/s 31.	It is regarded as conclusive proof, if it is made voluntarily and truly made.
It is usually not relevant if it is made on promise of secrecy u/s 23.	Confession is relevant if it is made on promise of secrecy u/s 29.
It can not be retracted	It can be retracted
Persons who are not parties can make admission u/s. 18, 19 & 20.	Confession can be made only by an accused.
It may not be Voluntarily made.	It must be direct, free and voluntarily made.
It cannot be used against the co-plaintiff or defendant.	It may be used against a co-accused u/s 30.
It may be used in favour of the maker as exception u/s.21	It is always used against the persons who make it.
It is relevant when made in police custody u/s 27.	It is irrelevant when made in police custody u/s 25 & 26.
No form of admission has been prescribed.	It has prescribed format for recording u/s 164 of Cr.P.C.

Q106. State any two presumptions under law of Evidence.

According to Black’s Law Dictionary a presumption, is a rebuttable assumption of fact, resulting from a rule of law which requires such fact to he assumed from another factor group of facts found or otherwise established in the action that need to be expressly proved. Chapter V, Sections 79 to 90-A deal with the presumptions as to document.

Section 84 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, deals with the presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decisions. According to Section 84 of the Act, the Court shall presume the genuineness of every book purporting to be printed or published under the authority of the Government of any country, and to contain any of the laws of that country, and of every book purporting to contain reports of decisions of the Courts of such country.
Section 84 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, deals with the presumption as to powers-of-attorney. According to Section 84 of the Act, the Court shall presume that every document purporting to be a power-of-attorney, and to have been executed before, and authenticated by, a Notary Public, or any Court, Judge, Magistrate, 1[Indian] Consul or Vice-Consul, or representative of the Central Government, was so executed and authenticated.

Q107. Explain any three kinds of witnesses?

A witness is said to be competent when there is nothing in law to prevent him from appearing in the court and giving witness. Whether a witness is competent, depends on his capacity to understand the question put to him and the capacity to give rational answer thereto.

Different types of witnesses are as follows:

Prosecution witness – Any witness who has been brought into the court to testify by the prosecution while supporting their claims is called prosecution witness. The prosecution has discretion about the selection and sequence of production of prosecution witnesses.
Defence witness – Any person who justifies the contentions of the defence by providing such statements that can discharge the accused from any charges filed is called defence witness.
Eye witness – Any person who helps the court by describing the acts committed on the crime scene with complete authenticity as it was present there and has first-hand information.
Expert witness – Any person who has the professional, educational or judicial expertise on the matter beyond any average individual, and the court can rely on its testimony to declare a verdict.
Hostile witness – Any person who by his consequent statements gives out an impression of not letting out the truth or not desirous of hiding the truth.

Q108. What do you understand by proper custody of a document of 30 yrs old?

Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, deals with the proper custody of a document of 30 yrs old. According to Section 90 of the Act, where any document, purporting or proved to be thirty years old, is produced from any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume that the signature and every other part of such document, which purports to be in the handwriting of any particular person, is in that person’s handwriting, and, in the case of a document executed or attested, that it was duly executed and attested by the persons by whom it purports to be executed and attested.

Q109. What do you understand by a certified copy? What Is its value?

Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, deals withcertified copies of public documents. According to Section 76 of the Act,every public officer having the custody of a public document, which any person has a right to inspect, shall give that person on demand a copy of it on payment of the legal fees therefor, together with a certificate written at the foot of such copy that it is a true copy of such document or part thereof, as the case may be, and such certificate shall be dated and subscribed by such officer with his name and his official title, and shall be sealed, whenever such officer is authorized by law to make use of a seal; and such copies so certified shall be called certified copies.

Section 77 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, deals withproof of documents by production of certified copies. According to Section 77 of the Act, such certified copies may be produced in proof of the contents of the public documents or parts of the public documents of which they purport to be copies. Thus such certified copies are admissible in evidence.

Q110. Explain public documents.

Section 74 of the Indian evidence act provides the definition of the term Public document. According to this Section, the following documents are considered public documents:

The documents forming the acts or records of acts of sovereign authority;
The documents forming the acts or records of acts of official bodies and tribunals;
The documents forming the acts or records of acts of various officers like public officers, legislative, judicial officers and executive working in any part of India;
The public records which are kept in the state of private documents also come under this category.

Every other document which does not come under the above-mentioned category is considered as private documents according to Section 75 of the Indian Evidence Act. Section 76 of the Indian Evidence Act provides the power to public officers to provide certified copies of public documents when it is necessary and when the person has the right to demand copies and ask for the copy of the document.

Q111. Mr. A‟s death was very suspicious. His relative alleged that his death occurred due to poison. Whose witness will be relevant here? Why?

Here opinion of medical expert / coroner must be taken. A Forensic Medicine Expert or Coroner is a medical professional who works in coordination with others like a coronary investigator to determine the cause of death of a person who may have died in mysterious circumstances.

Chapter II Sections 45 to 51of the Indian Evidence Act deal with the relevancy of opinions of third persons. The provisions under these sections are exceptional to natural rule of law of evidence where the evidence is only that fact which is given by the witness on the basis of his knowledge and belief. This exception states that the court cannot draw its opinion on the technical matters as well as complicated matters which require the special knowledge of the person having acquired expertise on the relative field.

According to Section 45 of the Act, an expert is said to be a person having knowledge or expertise in any of the field like foreign law, science, art, identity of handwriting or finger expression and where such knowledge has been gathered by him by practice, observation, studies. The primary obligation of the expert witness is to assist the court on the cases which fall under the ambit of their expertise. They are not bound to compel the parties to pay their fees who have appointed them. Expert evidence is opinion evidence and it cannot replace the substantive evidence. It is the rule of the procedure that the expert witness must be corroborated either by direct evidence or by circumstantial evidence.

Q112. A document of 1987 is produced in respect of title of a property by the owner and possessor of the property. What presumption the court is permitted to take?

It is assumed that the document is produced in 2022 in the court. Hence this document is more than 30 years old. Chapter V, Sections 79 to 90-A deal with the presumptions as to document. 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

Q113. Defence lawyer objected to the question put to the witness by the public prosecutor on the ground that the question suggested the answer. Explain such questions? Explain three examinations.

There are three stages of examination of witness. Sec. 138 of the Indian Evidence Act, governs the order of examination, wherein the witness is examined in chief (Section 137 para 1), then cross-examined (Section 137 para 2) and then re-examined (if the opposition party so desires) (Section 137 para 3).

The order in which witnesses are to be produced for examination is to be decided by the party leading his evidence. However, the Court has a discretion to direct the order in which the witnesses shall be produced. Like all other discretion, it has to be unreliable. Delay in the examination of a witness does not make the evidence of such witness to be unreliable.

Q114. What is meant by Res Gestae?

Res Gestae is a Latin term which mean “Things done”. Facts forming part of a transaction or things done in part of transaction is called ‘Res Gestae’. Res Gestae is used to refer to a declaration that is made at an event that proves the event happened because the words were uttered upon witnessing the event.

Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with this doctrine. It lays down that “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 time and places.”

Doctrine of Res Gestae statements can fall into one of the three categories:

Words or phrases that either wholly or partially explain a physical act
Exclamations that are so spontaneous that they prevent anyone from successfully lying to the contrary
Statements that prove an individual’s state of mind

For example, res gestae would exist if a person yelled “FIRE” upon noticing that a fire had broken out in a crowded movie theatre. This declaration can be interpreted as proof that a fire actually happened.

Essentials for application of Doctrine of Res Gestae:

The fact is not the fact in issue.
It is connected to fact in issue.
It is part of same transaction
It may have occurred at the same time and place or at different time and places.

Q115. What is meant by Leading Questions?

Section 141 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 defines ‘Leading Questions’ as, “Any questions suggesting the answer which the person putting it wishes or expects to receive is called a leading question. Example: Is your name so and so?

Section 142 and Section 143 of the Act, provides circumstances under which the leading Questions may be asked or may not be asked. According to Section 142, leading questions must not, if objected to by the adverse party, be asked in anexamination-in-chief, or in re-examination, except with the permission of the Court. The Section further lays down that the court shall permit leading questions as to matters which are introductory or undisputed, or which have, in its opinion, been already sufficiently proved. According to Section 143 of the Act, leading questions can be asked in cross examination.

Q116. “A deed contains blanks. Explain with aid of the relevant legal provisions whether evidence can be given of facts which would show how the blanks were to be filled?

Sections 93 to section 100 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 lay down rules for interpretation of documents. Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act defines “Document”. “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.

Patent ambiguity must be understood as an ambiguity which is inherent in the words and s incapable of being dispelled either by any legal rules or applying a known, conventional meaning. Section 93 of the Indian Evidence Act specifically deals with patent ambiguity and no oral evidence is given to remove the patent ambiguity. Under Section 93 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, no evidence is admissible to show the meaning or to supply the defects in a document when the language used is, on its face, ambiguous or defective.

According to Section 93(b) of the Act, a deed contains blanks. Evidence cannot be given of facts which would show how they were meant to be filled.

Q117. “What do you understand by Conclusive Proof?

According to Section 4 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 “Conclusive proof” – Where one fact is declared by this Act to be conclusive proof of another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it.

Example: ABC’ and ‘XYZ’ are married but divorced. In this case, when the question arises whether ‘ABC’ and ‘XYZ’ are husband and wife if the decree of divorce is submitted to the Court, The court shall presume that they are no longer husband and wife from the date of such decree of divorce. In the above example, the Divorce decree is regarded as Conclusive proof.

Section 41 Section 112 and Section 113 of the Indian Evidence Act,1872 speaks about conclusive proof or Irrebuttable presumption of law as stated below:

Section 41 the Indian Evidence Act,1872 deals with “relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc jurisdiction”
Section 112 of the said Act, deals with ” Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy”
Section 113 of the Indian Evidence Act, deals with “Proof of cession of territory”

Q118. “What is the evidentiary value of the uncorroborated testimony of an Accomplice?

Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with Accomplice. The word Accomplice has not been defined in the Indian Evidence Act. According to Judicial decisions, an accomplice is one of the guilty associates or partners in the commission of crime or who in some way or the other is connected with the commission of crime or who admits that he has a conscious hand in the commission of a crime.

According to Section 133 of Indian Evidence Act, “An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person; and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.”

The evidence of an accomplice, though it is uncorroborated, may form the basis for conviction. The Court may presume that an accomplice is unworthy of credit unless the corroborated in material particulars. Under the English Law, the evidence of an accomplice against accused is no evidence at all.

Q119. “The question is whether Arun and Priya were married. Whether the fact that they were usually received and treated by their friends as husband and wife is relevant or not? Cite the relevant legal provision.

Yes, it is relevant fact. According to Section 50 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872,when the Court has to form an opinion as to the relationship of one person to another, the opinion, expressed by conduct, as to the existence of such relationship, or any person who, as a member of the family or otherwise, has special means of knowledge on the subject, is a relevant fact: Provided that such opinion shall not be sufficient to prove a marriage in proceedings under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (4 of 1869) or in prosecutions under section 494, 495, 497 or 498 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).

Q120. “A witness of whom nothing is known, is asked in cross-examination whether he is a dacoit. With the aid of the relevant legal provisions, explain whether such a question can be asked?

No, such question cannot be asked under Section 149 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. According to Section 137, para 2 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the examination of a witness by the adverse party is called his cross-examination. According to Section 148 of the Act, the Court must decide whether a witness should be compelled to answer or not. According to Section 149, any questions referred to in Section 148 are to be asked only when there are reasonable grounds to ask such questions that might injure the witness’s character or expose him. The questions that: are indecent and scandalous (Section 151) or are insulting or annoying. (Section 152) are barred in cross examination. Court can forbid them. Section 152 further states that the Court might forbid a question even if it is proper, but the Court thinks that it is needlessly offensive in form.

According to Section 149 of the Act, no such question as is referred to in section 148 ought to be asked, unless the person asking it has reasonable grounds for thinking that the imputation which it conveys is well-founded

Indian Evidence Act Questions 1 to 20
Indian Evidence Act Questions 21 to 40
Indian Evidence Act Questions 41 to 60
Indian Evidence Act Questions 61 to 80
Indian Evidence Act Questions 81 to 100
Indian Evidence Act Questions 101 to 120
Indian Evidence Act Questions 121 to 133

Leave a Reply Cancel reply