LawPage

Notes and Articles for Law students

User Tools

Site Tools


case_law:important_decisions_evidence_act_july_2018_211922122018

IMPORTANT DECISIONS (Cr) : EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 July 2018


S.3 - Evidence in criminal cases needs to be evaluated on touchstone of consistency. (H.P.) 009
S.3 - Evidence - Minor contradiction or inconsistency cannot be made basis to discard whole evidence as unreliable, particularly when two Courts took note of said evidence and discarded it being wholly immaterial. ( S.C.) 155
S.3 - Related witness and interested witness - Difference - Term related is not equivalent to interested - Witness may be called interested only when he or she derives some benefit from result of a litigation in decree in a civil case or in seeing an accused person punished - A witness who is a natural one and is the only possible eye witness in circumstances of a case cannot be said to be 'interested'. ( S.C.) 065
S.3 - Related/interested witness - Merely because eye-witnesses are family members their evidence cannot per se be discarded - When there is allegation of interestedness same has to be established - Mere statement that being relatives of deceased they are likely to falsely implicate accused cannot be ground to discard evidence which is otherwise cogent and credible. ( S.C.) 065
S.3 - Related/interested witness - Relationship is not a factor to affect credibility of a witness - It is more often than not that a relation would not conceal actual culprit and make allegations against an innocent person - Foundation has to be laid if plea of false implication is made. ( S.C.) 065
S.24 - Extra judicial confession - Merely because signature of police is on top of left corner of confessional statement of accused, Court cannot throw away such statement, particularly when said signature was put by Inspector of police only as an acknowledgment for receipt of confessional statement from PW10, before whom statement was made by accused. (Madras) (DB) 094
S.65-B - Electronic record - Non-production of certificate u/s 65-B(4) of the Act - Pen drive and transcript attached with charge sheet can be looked into without certificate in terms of S.65-B of the Act at the time of framing of charge, as even though there has to be strict compliance of S.65-B of the Act, pertaining to any electronic data, noncompliance of same would not render the said document inadmissible at the time of framing of charge. (P&H) 247
Ss.65, 66 - Secondary evidence - Photocopies of mark sheet - Plea in application for secondary evidence that originals are with the petitioners - Despite receipt of copy of said application, petitioners did not contend that original are not in their possession - Fulfills the condition of giving notice u/s 66 of the Act - Held, it fulfills the condition of giving notice u/ss 66 of the Act - No interference warranted in order allowing secondary evidence. (Rajasthan) 260
S.118 - Child witness - Act does not prescribe a particular age as a determining factor to prove a witness to be a competent one - A child of a tender age can also be allowed to testify in case he is found to be capable of understanding questions and of giving rational answers thereto. (P&H) 122
S.118, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Ss.6, 10 - Testimony of child witnesses/victims - Sexual assault of two minor girls by their step father - Child witnesses are not competent to depose as per Magistrate - However, barely after 2 months thereafter both the victims when examined gave graphic details of alleged incident before trial Court - Victims specifically deposed that her mother had told them what to say before court - They stated that accused used to keep them as his daughters - It is thus, not safe to solely rely upon the evidence of both the victims to convict accused. (P&H) 122


Navigation: Home»Case Laws