EVIDENCE ACT - 1872

Law of Evidence is Lexi Fori

Scheme of Act
1. Part 1- Relevancy of Fact – 5 to 55
2. Part 2 – on Proof – 56 to 100
3. Part 3- Production and Effect of evidence -101 to 167

Sec 1 to 4 : Preliminary
3 : Definition of Fact & Fact in Issue
: Proved, Disproved and Not Proved
4 : Presumption
May Presume, Shall Presume, Conclusive Proof
Sec 5 – 55 : Relevancy of Fact
5 to 16 : Relevancy of fact
5 : Evidence of fact and relevant to fact
6 : Res gestae – Statement of forming same transaction
7 : Occasion, Cause, Effect, Opportunity, State of things
8 : Motive, Preparation, Previous or subsequent conduct
9 : necessary to explain or introduce – Identification parade
10 : conspiracy
11 : Plea of Alibi
13 : Right of Custom
14 : State of Mind or Body feelings
15 : Accident or Incidental
17 to 23: Admission
24 to 30: Confession
25 to 27: Confession to police
26 : Confession in police custody
27 : Relevancy of information while in police custody – recovery
30 : Confession co- accused
32 (1) : Dying Declaration – statement of person who cannot be called as witness
34 to 38: Statement made under special consideration (book entries, map, public)
34 : Entries in book of account
35 : Statement in public document
40 to 44 : Judgement of court of justice
45 to 51 : Expert Opinion
47 : Handwritten
52 to 55 : Character when relevant
53 : Criminal its relevant
Sec 56 to 58 : Facts, which need not to be proved - Judicial Notice
Sec 59 and 60 : Oral Evidence
59 : Proof of fact / document by Oral evidence
60 : Hearsay Evidence
Sec 61 to 90.A : Documentary Evidence
62 : Primary Evidence
63 : Secondary Evidence
74 : Public Document
75 : Private Document
90 : Ancient Document – 30 years old
Sec 91 to 100 : Exclusion of oral Evidence
93 : Patent Ambiguity – cannot give oral evidence
95 : Latent Ambiguity- can give oral evidence
Sec 101 to 114A: Burden of Proof – Onus Probandi
101 : Onus Probandi
102 to 106 : General and Special
 102 : whom the burden f proof lies – Res Ipsa Loquitor (negligence)
107 to 114 : The justification of presumption and burden of proof
107 : proving death of a person alive within 30 years
108 : person alive not be heard for 7 years
112 : Legitimacy
113A : Suicide abetment
113B : Dowry death
114A : Absents of consent - rape
Sec 115 to 117 : Estoppel
115 : Estoppel
Sec 118 to 134 : Competency and Compellability of Witness
119 : Dumb Witness
121 to 128 : Privileged communications
122 : Communication during marriage
123 : Evidence affair to state
133 : Accomplice witness
Sec 135 to 166 : Examination of Witness
137 : Stages in examination
: Examination in chief, Cross -Examination, Re- Examination
141 to 143 : Leading Question
154 : Hostile Witness
159 to 161 : Refreshing memory
165 : Judge power to put question
167 : Improper admission and Rejection of Evidence

Hearsay Evidence
S P Subramanya v KSRTC—oral need proof , sec 59
State of UP v Satish Chandhra- deceased escape
Vijendhar v State of Delhi- kidnapped
Tape recorder
S Prathap Singh v State of Punjab – civil surgeon, CM, leave
Ram Reddy v VV Giri – can be primary evidence
R M Malkani v State of Maharashtra- coroner of Bombay, bribe
Poothil Damodharan Nair v Babu
Secondary Evidence
Ashok v Madhava Lal – Photostat is permitted , adversary
Circumstantial Evidence
Har Dayal v State of Up – child kidnapped
Kalua v State of UP – accidental shooting
Anant Chintaman Lagu v State of Bombay – Pune doctor , widow Lakshmibai Karve
Father Benedict v State of kerala –acquitted by HC
KV Chacko v Saji v State of Kerala – SC three test
Saji v State of Kerala – car driver killed, three accused
Res Gestae -6
Ratten v The queen - gun shot , get me the police please, valid
R v Beding Field – cut throat, not valid
R M Malkani v State of Maharashtra- coroner of Bombay, bribe, under sec 6
Indira v State HP- Daughter raped, narration to mother not valid
Occasion, Cause, Effect, Opportunity, State of Things – 7
R v Donnellan – replace medicine with poison
Ratten v Reginam – Killed his wife , unhappy and second affair
Motive, Preparation, Previous or subsequent conduct
Motive- Nathan Singh v Emperor -evidence committing crime weak, then motive is relevant
Ranganayaki v State – it is unsound that no criminal act if unless motive proved
Explain and Introduce – Identification
Dana Yadav v State of Bihar – SC , identification parade at the time of investigation to
corroborate substantive evidence
Acharuparambhathu Pradeepan & Other v State of Kerala – Jayakrishnan master murder
Delay in Identification parade is not valid
Saji & Oth v State of Kerala – Parade is not lost solely on the ground picture in publications
Conspiracy
Bhagavan Swarup v State of Maharashtra –analysed sec 10
Kehar Singh v State of Delhi- convicted
L K Advani v CBI - acquitted
Mirza Akbar v Emperor – convicted
Jayendra Saraswathi Swamigal v Tamil nadu – grant bail
Alibi- elsewhere
Dhananjaya v State of WB- such a long distance
Munshi Prasad v State of Bihar – 400-500 yards not valid
Accidental or Intention
Noorul Amin v Emperror – fire insurance shop
Admission
S V R raju v N J Raju
Baseela v Stern - Silence
Confession
Pakkala Narayana Swamy v Emperor
Palwvinder Kaur v State of Punjab
Pulukuri Kotaiah v Emperror
Prakashan v State of Kerala – extra judicial is not weak
Santhosh v State of Kerala – Exact word should be recorded

Seethamaniyan v State of Kerala – Police IPS office, if not investigated then valid
State of Maharashtra v Bharat Fakira Dhiwar – recovery, child rape, stain stone, open
Kashmira Singh v State of MP- Gurucharan singh acquited, murder young boy, co-accused
Dying Declaration
Pakkala Narayana Swamy v Emperor – body seven cut, letter to collect money
Kaushal Rao v State f Bombay - Thukkaram, rival fight
Chinnamma v State of Kerala -
Ravikumar v State of TN
Expert Opinion
Ram Narain v State of UP – Boy kidnapped, handwritten letter
Ancient Document
Kunhamina Umma v Special Tahasildar
Burden of proof
Arjun Banchar v Bunchi Banchar – those who allege would have to prove
Dayabhai v State of Gujarat – prosecution must prove
Jayalakshmi ammal v A Gopal pathar – 7 years
Chirathakutty v Subramanian – Vasectomy
Nanda Vasudevan v latha – DNA approved
Suicide Abetment
Guru Bachan Singh v Satpal Singh – Guru’s daughter – body fire,
Dowry Deaths
Bhoora Singh v State
Absent of consent – rape
Tukaram v State of Maharashtra – Mathura Rape case
Estoppel
Picard v Sears
Geetha Mishra v Uthkal University – BSc II
Pratimadoss v State - MBBS
Promissory Estoppel
MP Sugar Mills v State of UP
Child Witness
Raj Kumar v State of MP
Kunjumon v State of Kerala
Communication During Marriage
TJ Ponnen v M C Vargheese – defamatory content , father in law
Cross Examination
Juwar Singh v State of MP – SC
Padakalingam v Yesudasan
Re-Examination
Prince v Samo
Hostile Witness
Sat Paul v Delhi Administration -Anti corruption department
Kehar Singh v State
Koli Lakh
Trap Witness
Sadhashiv v State of Maharashtra
Injured witness
Kunjumon v State of Kerala
Inimical Witness – Enimity
Sushil Sharma v State – murder wife, lover witness
Panch Witness- Mahazar
Yakum Menon v State of Maharashtra
Judge power to put question
State of Rajasthan v Ani
Falsus in Uno falsus in omnibus
Hamsa V State of Kerala
Paulmeli v State of TN
Partisian Witness
Nagappan v State – If corroborated with medical evidence its valid