102073462-Oral-and-Documentary-Evidence.docx
Short Description
Download 102073462-Oral-and-Documentary-Evidence.docx...
Description
Roll No. A322154088
A Comparitive Study of Oral and Doumentary !videne
"RO#!C$ %OR $&! S'(#!C$
!videne )a*
S'(+,$$!D (-
Srey ti*ari Seme/ter (.(.A.)).(. &on/
1
NATURE AND FUNCTION OF THE LAW OF EVIDENCE !very a/e tat ome/ efore a ourt of la* a/ a fat /tory eind it fat/ out of *i a/e/ ari/e eep appenin6 in te ordinary our/e of life. $ere i/ a ro*ded road for e7ample people are movin6 veile are movin6. !veryone i/ runnin6 at unmiti6ated /peed /uddenly t*o veile/ run a6ain/t ea oter. One of tem ein6 loaded *it dynamite te aident produe an e7plo/ion *it a /oin6 noi/e a/ a re/ult of *i a noi/e in a neary o/pital drop/ a ild from and/ in9urin6 te ild a/e/ ari/in6 out of te aident *it flo* into te ourt/. ,n ea a/e te nature and au/e of te aident *ould e in :ue/tion. $e fat/ *i led up to te lima7 *ill ave to reon/trut efore te ourt. So tat 9ud6e i/ ale on/ider te real appenin6. Only ten e *ill e in po/ition to apply te appropriate la* to te fat to arrived at a 9u/t /olution aout te ri6t and liailitie/ of te partie/. $u/ *enever a 9ud6e i/ alled upon to pronoune upon te ri6t and liailitie/ of partie/ ari/in6 out of fat ertain information aout te fat/ involved in i/ mind a/ to *at te real fat/ are fat/ mu/t e proved in te fir/t in/tane/ and te only te matter i/ rife for appliation of relevant la*/. $e pratial reality i/ tat te trut or merit/ of a a/e are *ort le// unle// tey an e proved to e aeptane of te 9ud6e and tere to enale im to at on tem. $e mean/ y *i fat/ are proved are 6overned y te la* of evidene. $e funtion of te la* of evidene i/ lay do*n rule/ aordin6 to *i te fat/ of a/e an e proved or di/proved efore a ourt of la*. $e mean/ *i an e u/ed to prove a fat are all ontrol y te rule/ and priniple/ laid do*n y te la* of evidene. $e la* of evidene doe/ not affet /u/tantive
2
ri6t of partie/ ut only lay/ do*n te la* for failitatin6 te rule/ of evidene for te purpo/e/ of te 6uidane of te ourt. ,t i/ proedural la* *i provide/ inter alie o* a fat i/ to e proved. $e evidene mean/ any tin6/ y *i any alle6ed matter of fat/ i/ eiter e/tali/ or di/proved. Anytin6 tat mae/ te tin6 in :ue/tion evidene to te ourt evidene. ;ere te :ue/tion i/ *eter an e7plo/ion too plae efore a fire ourred evidene an e ot oral and doumentary and eletroni reord/ an e produed a/ evidene. !ven in riminal matter al/o tere an e evidene y mean/ of eletroni reord/ inludin6 video< onferenin6. $e noi/e of te e7plo/ion and it/ fla/ are evidene of it. "er/on/ *o an te fla/ or eard te noi/e an 6ive evidene of te fat of te e7plo/ion. ,f te appenin6 of te fat i/ reorded on any tin6 apart from uman meanin6 tat reord i/ al/o an evidene of appenin6 tu/ evidene an e defined a/ any material *i tend/ to per/uade te ourt of te trut or proaility of /ome fat a//erted efore.
3
MODES OF PROOF Oral evidence Oral Evidence Section 5 !"# All fat/ e7ept te =ontent/ of doument/ or eletroni reord/> ontent/ of doument/ may e proved y oral evidene.
De$nition o% oral evidence "# Sec & $e meanin6 of e7pre//ion ?Oral evidene@ i/ 6iven alon6 *it te definition of te term ?evidene@ in Se 3. $i/ fir/t part of te provi/ion *i define/ evidene deal *it oral evidene it /ay/ < All te /tatement/ *i te ourt permit/ or re:uire/ to e made efore it y *itne// in relation to te matter of four under in:uiry /u /tatement/ are alled oral evidene.
Oral evidene i/ evidene *i i/ onfined to *ord/ /poen y te mout.
Word' o% t(e Section"# $i/ /etion i/ not very appily *orded ontent/ of doumentary may e proved y oral evidene under ertain irum/tane/ tat i/ to /ay *en /u evidene of teir ontent i/ admi//ile a/ /eondary evidene.
Content' o% doc)*ent can not +e ,roved +- oral evidence "# 1 Indian Evidence Act, 1872. 4
It is rule of evidence not one of technically but of substance that, where written documents eist they shall be !roduced as bein" two best evidence of their own contents.
W(at %act *a- +e ,roved +- oral evidence" # #ral evidence may su$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 evidene mu/t in all a/e/ *atever e diretB tat i/ to /ay if it refer/ to a fat *i ould e /een it mu/t e te evidene of a *itne// *o /ay/ e /a* itB if it refer/ to a fat *i ould e eard it mu/t e te evidene of a *itne// *o /ay/ e eard itB if it refer/ to a fat *i ould e pereived y any oter /en/e or in any oter manner it mu/t e te evidene of a *itne// *o /ay/ e pereived it y tat /en/e or in tat mannerB if it refer/ to an opinion or to te 6round/ on *i tat opinion i/ eld it mu/t e te evidene of te per/on *o old/ tat opinion on to/e 6round/ "rovided tat te opinion/ of e7pert/ e7pre//ed in any treati/e ommonly offered for /ale and te 6round/ on *i /u opinion/ are eld may e proved y te prodution of /u treati/e/ if te autor i/ dead or annot e found or a/ eome inapale of 6ivin6 evidene or annot e alled a/ a *itne// *itout an amount of delay or e7pen/e *i te Court re6ard/ a/ unrea/onale "rovided al/o tat if oral evidene refer/ to te e7i/tene or ondition of any material tin6 oter tan a doument te Court may if it tin/ fit re:uire te prodution of /u material tin6 for it/ in/petion.
2 Indian Evidence Act, 1872. &
PRINCIPLE"# $e fir/t de6ree of moral evidene and tat *i i/ mo/t /ati/fatory to te mind i/ afforded y our o*n /en/e ti/ ein6 te diret evidene of te i6e/t nature. ;ere ti/ an not e ad a/ i/ 6enerally te a/e in te proof of fat 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 eternal event has is some way or other im!ressed itself on corres!ond to the witness, then should adeuately res!ected or corres!ond to the fact itself as it ob-ectively eisted or eist. +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 ecluded 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" ece!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 au/ed *i an appealed to te Supreme Court a6ain/t i/ onvition *a/ te oroner of (omay. A dotor *o *a/ runnin6 a nur/in6 ome operated upon a patient *o after*ard/ died. ,t ein6 a po/t
View more...
Comments