Law of Evidence

  • Marking of a Document as Exhibit is Not Proof of its Contents

    The legal position is not in dispute that mere production and marking of a document as exhibit by the Court cannot be held to be a due proof of its contents. Its execution has to be proved by admissible evidence. “16. ………………..The legal position is not in dispute that mere production and marking of a…

  • FIR is a Public Document – Section 74 Indian Evidence Act

    81. It is an undisputed position of law that the FIR is a public document defined under Section 74 of the Evidence Act. Various High Courts have expressed this view from time to time. a) In the case of Channappa Andanappa Siddareddy and others v. State 1980 Crl LJ 1022, the Karnataka High Court held…

  • Judicial Notice – Section 56 of Indian Evidence Act

    65. This Court, in its various pronouncements, has taken support of Section 56 of the Evidence Act to do substantial justice in respective matters. Some of them are being reproduced hereinafter to get a better picture of how judicial notice is taken: a) In the case of State of Kerala v. Unni (2007) 2 SCC…

  • Evidentiary Value of a Chance Witness – Supreme Court

    “21. In Sachchey Lal Tiwari v. State of U.P. [(2004) 11 SCC 410: 2004 SCC (Cri) Supp 105] this Court while considering the evidentiary value of the chance witness in a case of murder which had taken place in a street and a passerby had deposed that he had witnessed the incident, observed as under:…

  • Adverse Inference – John H. Wigmore – Quote

    “It has always been understood – the inference, indeed, is one of the simplest in human experience – that a party’s falsehood or other fraud in the preparation and presentation of his cause, his fabrication or suppression of evidence by bribery or spoliation, and all similar conduct is receivable against him as an indication of…

  • Section 239 CrPC – Discharge and Probative Value of Material on Record

    11.2. In the recent decision of this Court in State of Karnataka v. M.R. Hiremath, (2019) 7 SCC 515, one of us (D.Y. Chandrachud, J.) speaking for the Bench has observed and held in para 25 as under: “25. The High Court [M.R. Hiremath v. State, 2017 SCC OnLine Kar 4970] ought to have been cognizant of the fact that the…

  • Supreme Court on Question of Fact

    “65. In Suwalal Chhogalal v. CIT, (1949) 17 ITR 269 (Nag) the Court held as under: (ITR p. 277) “… A fact is a fact irrespective of evidence by which it is proved. The only time a question of law can arise in such a case is when it is alleged that there is no…


Popular Posts


Search the website


Law Quotes


Latest Posts


error: