102073462 Oral and Documentary Evidence

Roll No. A322154088

A Comparitive Study of Oral and Doumentary !videne

"RO#!C$ %OR $&! S'(#!C$

!videne )a*

S'(+,$$!D (-

Srey ti*ari Seme/ter   (.(.A.)).(. &on/

1

NATURE AND FUNCTION OF THE LAW OF EVIDENCE !very a/e tat ome/ efore a ourt of la* a/ a fat /tory eind it fat/ out of *i a/e/ ari/e eep appenin6 in te ordinary our/e of life. $ere i/ a ro*ded road for e7ample people are movin6 veile are movin6. !veryone i/ runnin6 at unmiti6ated /peed /uddenly t*o veile/ run a6ain/t ea oter. One of tem ein6 loaded *it dynamite te aident produe an e7plo/ion *it a /oin6 noi/e a/ a re/ult of *i a noi/e in a neary o/pital drop/ a ild from and/ in9urin6 te ild a/e/ ari/in6 out of te aident *it flo* into te ourt/. ,n ea a/e te nature and au/e of te aident *ould e in :ue/tion. $e fat/ *i led up to te lima7 *ill ave to reon/trut efore te ourt. So tat 9ud6e i/ ale on/ider te real appenin6. Only ten e *ill e in po/ition to apply te appropriate la* to te fat to arrived at a 9u/t /olution aout te ri6t and liailitie/ of te partie/. $u/ *enever a 9ud6e i/ alled upon to pronoune upon te ri6t and liailitie/ of partie/ ari/in6 out of fat ertain information aout te fat/ involved in i/ mind a/ to *at te real fat/ are fat/ mu/t e proved in te fir/t in/tane/ and te only te matter i/ rife for appliation of relevant la*/. $e pratial reality i/ tat te trut or merit/ of a a/e are *ort le// unle// tey an e proved to e aeptane of te 9ud6e and tere to enale im to at on tem. $e mean/ y *i fat/ are proved are 6overned y te la* of evidene. $e funtion of te la* of evidene i/ lay do*n rule/ aordin6 to *i te fat/ of a/e an e proved or di/proved efore a ourt of la*. $e mean/ *i an e u/ed to prove a fat are all ontrol y te rule/ and priniple/ laid do*n y te la* of evidene. $e la* of evidene doe/ not affet /u/tantive

2

ri6t of partie/ ut only lay/ do*n te la* for failitatin6 te rule/ of evidene for te purpo/e/ of te 6uidane of te ourt. ,t i/ proedural la* *i provide/ inter alie o* a fat i/ to e proved. $e evidene mean/ any tin6/ y *i any alle6ed matter of fat/ i/ eiter e/tali/ or di/proved. Anytin6 tat mae/ te tin6 in :ue/tion evidene to te ourt evidene. ;ere te :ue/tion i/ *eter an e7plo/ion too plae efore a fire ourred evidene an e ot oral and doumentary and eletroni reord/ an e produed a/ evidene. !ven in riminal matter al/o tere an e evidene y mean/ of eletroni reord/ inludin6 video< onferenin6. $e noi/e of te e7plo/ion and it/ fla/ are evidene of it. "er/on/ *o an te fla/ or eard te noi/e an 6ive evidene of te fat of te e7plo/ion. ,f te appenin6 of te fat i/ reorded on any tin6 apart from uman meanin6 tat reord i/ al/o an evidene of appenin6 tu/ evidene an e defined a/ any material *i tend/ to per/uade te ourt of te trut or proaility of /ome fat a//erted efore.

3

MODES OF PROOF Oral evidence Oral Evidence Section 5 !"# All fat/ e7ept te =ontent/ of doument/ or eletroni reord/> ontent/ of doument/ may e proved y oral evidene.

De$nition o% oral evidence "# Sec &  $e meanin6 of e7pre//ion ?Oral evidene@ i/ 6iven alon6 *it te definition of te term ?evidene@ in Se 3. $i/ fir/t part of te  provi/ion *i define/ evidene deal *it oral evidene it /ay/ < All te /tatement/ *i te ourt  permit/ or re:uire/ to e made efore it y *itne// in relation to te matter of four under in:uiry /u /tatement/ are alled oral evidene.

Oral evidene i/ evidene *i i/ onfined to *ord/ /poen y te mout.

Word' o% t(e Section"# $i/ /etion i/ not very appily *orded ontent/ of doumentary may  e proved y oral evidene under ertain irum/tane/  tat i/ to /ay *en /u evidene of teir  ontent i/ admi//ile a/ /eondary evidene.

Content' o% doc)*ent can not +e ,roved +- oral evidence "# 1 Indian Evidence Act, 1872. 4

It is rule of evidence not one of technically but of substance that, where written documents eist they shall be !roduced as bein" two best evidence of their own contents.

W(at %act *a- +e ,roved +- oral evidence" #  #ral evidence may su$ce to !rove !ossession oral evidence of credible would be su$cient to !rove a little by !rescri!tion.

Oral evidence .ei/( and val)e" #  where oral evidence is con%ictin" and where documentary evidence does not hel! on in comin" to a decisive conclusion the duly !ro!er course is to see what are the admitted fact in case and what case the circumstance deducible from the can be no doubt this can be the true method of arisin" a correct conclusion.

 SECTION 0123 Oral evidence *)'t +e direct 4 Oral evidene mu/t in all a/e/ *atever e diretB tat i/ to /ay  if it refer/ to a fat *i ould e /een it mu/t e te evidene of a *itne// *o /ay/ e /a* itB if it refer/ to a fat *i ould e eard it mu/t e te evidene of a *itne// *o /ay/ e eard itB if it refer/ to a fat *i ould e pereived y any oter /en/e or in any oter manner it mu/t e te evidene of a *itne// *o /ay/ e pereived it y tat /en/e or in tat mannerB if it refer/ to an opinion or to te 6round/ on *i tat opinion i/ eld it mu/t e te evidene of te  per/on *o old/ tat opinion on to/e 6round/ "rovided tat te opinion/ of e7pert/ e7pre//ed in any treati/e ommonly offered for /ale and te 6round/ on *i /u opinion/ are eld may e proved y te prodution of /u treati/e/ if te autor  i/ dead or annot e found or a/ eome inapale of 6ivin6 evidene or annot e alled a/ a *itne// *itout an amount of delay or e7pen/e *i te Court re6ard/ a/ unrea/onale "rovided al/o tat if oral evidene refer/ to te e7i/tene or ondition of any material tin6 oter tan a doument te Court may if it tin/ fit re:uire te prodution of /u material tin6 for it/ in/petion.

2 Indian Evidence Act, 1872. &

PRINCIPLE"# $e fir/t de6ree of moral evidene and tat *i i/ mo/t /ati/fatory to te mind i/ afforded y our o*n /en/e ti/ ein6 te diret evidene of te i6e/t nature. ;ere ti/ an not e ad a/ i/ 6enerally te a/e in te proof of fat y oral te/timony.

Te'ti*onial ele*ent'"#  'hen a witness statement is o(ered as a basis of an evidence in reference inference to the fact stated. )oreover in the function ful*lled by each these three element or !rocesses are to be found in "eneral from the fundamental can not for assi"nin" to each its !robative value. +hus the nation of !erce!tion that the eternal event has is some way or other im!ressed itself on corres!ond to the witness, then should adeuately res!ected or corres!ond to the fact itself as it ob-ectively eisted or eist. +he stren"th of the inference de!ends on the !robability of a fairly accurate on the !art of witness.

eneral ()*an trail' a6ectin/ te'ti*on-" #  ut the individual witness testimony is a(ected not merely by the condition inherent in there three elements of testimony, but also by enabled to "enerali/e. +hese "enerali/e common to lar"e of individual may at time *nd him set.

Race"# In res!ect to the element of testimony !erce!tion, recollection and narration !rofessional any scienti*c observation have thus for contributed little 0nowled"e that is serviceable in estimatin" the in%uence of value u! on testimony in -udicial !roceedin". In this connection there are several more condition !ertainin" to "eneral sense !erce!tion. irst of all there is that so called vicariousness of sense which ubstitute. #ne sense for another in re!resentation.+he vicariousness of visual sensation are the most humerous and the most im!ortant. Any body who has been !ushed or beaten and has felt the blow will of other circumstance !ermit and the im!ulse be stron" be stron" enou"h be convicted that he has been seen his assaulter and manner of the assault.

CASE"# 

 ASHO7 7UMAR ROUT 8 ETC V9S STATE OF :IHAR&

FACT" # Admissibility of oral evidence faction of statement and truth of  statement of all hearsay statement and truth of statement of all hearsay statement is not inadmissible. +here is distinction between !rovin" the faction of statement and !rovin" truth of statement. It is admissible if such evidence !ro!oses to establish only the faction of  statement made by #ther !erson and not the truth of statement. uidance of informant only !ro!osed to establish action of statement which was "iven to him by eye witness. +herefore, it is admissible and it 5annot be re-ected.

Doc)*entar- evidence )EA6I6 the e!ression 9documentary evidence: as it is de*ned in section 3 4, means ;All documents includin" records !roduced for the ins!ection of the 5ourt< such documents are called documentary evidence.  +he e!ression 9document: is de*ned in section 3 as follows 9=ocument:> means any matter e!ressed or described u!on any substance by means of letter, *"ures or ma0es, or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which may be used, for the !ur!ose of recordin" that matter.  .3 de*nes the term ?evidence@ as meanin" and includin" oral and documentary evidence. All evidence comes to the tribunal either as the statement of a witness or as the statement of a document, i.e., oral or documentary evidence. +he !resent cha!ter deals with the documentary evidence, i.e., the mode of !roof of contents of documents old documents either by !rimary or secondary evidence, the ty!es of documents, vi/., !ublic and !rivate documents of the !resum!tions as to the documents. ather we are "oin" to deal with the 3 main as!ects  3 AI 2BBB )C 1D2B 4 Indian Evidence Act, 1872. 7

a Fow documents are to be !roved the manner of, b 'hat are the !resum!tions about the various 0inds of documents, and c 'hen is oral evidence ecluded by documentary evidenceG

 It has been said that the word 9document: as used in the law of evidence 9should not be construed restrictively. Etymolo"ically the word means somethin" which shows or teaches and is evidential or informative in its character. 'here the statement of !arties containin" the terms of a com!romise were recorded by a court and duly si"ned, it was to be held to be a document with re"ard to recorded ta!e, it was said that there is 9no reason in !rinci!le why the recordin" in recordin" in some !ermanent or semi>!ermanent manner of human voice Hor other sounds which are relevant to the issue to the determined, !rovided that it furnishes information, cannot be a document:. In rece!tion to the rece!tion into evidence of models, ma!s, dia"rams and !hotos, it is to observe in 'I)#E 9that for evidentiary !ur!oses they are nothin" ece!t so far as they have a human bein"@s credit to su!!ort them. +hen they become media of communication as a su!erior substitute for words.:

R2M2Mal;ani v2 State o% Ma(ara'(tra 5   $e au/ed *i an appealed to te Supreme Court a6ain/t i/ onvition *a/ te oroner of  (omay. A dotor *o *a/ runnin6 a nur/in6 ome operated upon a patient *o after*ard/ died. ,t  ein6 a po/t