Indian Evidence Act - Study Mode

[#1501] Which Section of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals only with civil matters?
Correct Answer

(A) Section-23

Explanation

Solution: Definition of Civil Matters under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Civil matters refer to legal disputes between individuals or organizations regarding rights, obligations, and liabilities, as opposed to criminal matters which deal with offenses against the state. Explanation of the Correct Answer: The correct answer is Option A: Section 23 . Section 23 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Section 23 specifically deals with admissions in civil cases . It states that in civil cases, an admission cannot be used as evidence if it was made under an agreement that it would not be given as evidence, or if it was made with the express or implied condition that it should not be disclosed. Purpose of Section 23: This provision is intended to protect parties from having their settlement discussions or private agreements used against them in court. It encourages dispute resolution without fear of repercussions in future litigation. Example: If two parties to a contract dispute negotiate privately and one party admits fault, this admission cannot be used in court if it was made under an agreement that such statements would remain confidential. Explanation of Other Options: Option B: Section 27 – Incorrect. Section 27 deals with the admissibility of confessions made by an accused in police custody, which is relevant in criminal cases, not civil matters. Option C: Section 53 – Incorrect. Section 53 pertains to character evidence in criminal proceedings, stating that the good character of an accused is relevant in criminal trials but not in civil matters. Option D: Section 133 – Incorrect. Section 133 relates to the testimony of an accomplice in criminal cases and does not pertain to civil matters. Thus, the correct answer is Option A: Section 23 , as it exclusively deals with admissions in civil cases.

[#1502] Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act is related to
Correct Answer

(B) Accomplice

Explanation

Solution: Definition of Accomplice: An accomplice is a person who has taken part in the commission of a crime, either by directly participating, aiding, or abetting the offense. In legal proceedings, the testimony of an accomplice is often viewed with caution due to their involvement in the crime. Explanation of the Correct Answer: The correct answer is Option B: Accomplice . Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Section 133 deals with the admissibility of an accomplice's testimony. It states that an accomplice is a competent witness against an accused person, and a conviction is not illegal merely because it is based on the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice . Key Points of Section 133: An accomplice is legally allowed to testify in court. A conviction can be based solely on an accomplice’s statement. However, courts generally exercise caution and seek corroboration before relying solely on an accomplice’s testimony. Illustration: If 'X' and 'Y' commit a robbery and 'Y' turns into a prosecution witness against 'X', 'Y' is considered an accomplice. According to Section 133, 'Y' can be a competent witness, but the court will typically look for additional evidence to support 'Y's statement. Explanation of Other Options: Option A: Number of Witnesses – Incorrect. The number of witnesses is covered under Section 134, which states that no specific number of witnesses is required to prove a fact. Option C: Oral Evidence – Incorrect. Oral evidence is dealt with in Sections 59 and 60 of the Indian Evidence Act, which pertain to statements that are made in court. Option D: Relevancy of Facts – Incorrect. The relevancy of facts is covered under Sections 5 to 55 of the Indian Evidence Act, which define what facts are admissible in court. Thus, the correct answer is Option B: Accomplice , as Section 133 specifically addresses the evidentiary value of an accomplice’s testimony.

[#1503] For the admissibility of a dying declaration, it is not necessary that the statement:
Correct Answer

(B) The person making the statement must be under expectation of death

Explanation

Solution: Dying Declaration: A dying declaration is a statement made by a person regarding the cause of their death or the circumstances leading to it, which is admissible in court under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Correct Answer: Option B - The person making the statement must be under expectation of death Under the Indian Evidence Act, it is not necessary for a person making a dying declaration to be under the expectation of imminent death. Unlike English law, which requires the declarant to believe that death is certain, Indian law allows a dying declaration to be admitted even if the person did not expect to die, as long as it relates to the cause of death. Explanation of Other Options: Option A: Relates to cause of death - A dying declaration must relate to the cause of death or circumstances leading to it. If the statement does not pertain to the cause of death, it may not be admissible. Option C: The person making the statement must be competent - Competency of the declarant is necessary. If the person making the dying declaration was mentally unsound or incapable of understanding the situation, the statement may not be considered valid. Option D: The statement must be complete - A dying declaration should ideally be complete, but even if it is incomplete due to the declarant’s condition, the court may still consider the relevant portion admissible. Thus, the key point is that unlike in English law, under Indian law, a dying declaration does not require the declarant to be under the expectation of death for it to be admissible in evidence.

[#1504] Which one of the following sections of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 has been inserted by the Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1986
Correct Answer

(C) Section 113B

Explanation

Solution: Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1986: This amendment was introduced to curb the increasing instances of dowry-related offenses, particularly dowry deaths. It added specific provisions in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, to strengthen the legal framework against such crimes. Correct Answer: Option C - Section 113B Section 113B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872: This section was inserted by the Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1986. It deals with the presumption as to dowry death. According to Section 113B: If a woman dies due to burns or bodily injury, or in any other unnatural circumstances, within seven years of her marriage, and it is shown that she was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection with a demand for dowry shortly before her death, the court shall presume that her husband or his relatives caused the dowry death. This provision shifts the burden of proof onto the accused, meaning the husband or relatives must prove their innocence if such circumstances exist. Explanation of Other Options: Option A: Section 111A - This section deals with the presumption as to certain offenses, including abetment of suicide and terrorist activities. It is unrelated to dowry death. Option B: Section 113A - This section presumes abetment of suicide if a married woman commits suicide within seven years of marriage due to cruelty by her husband or in-laws. Although related to women’s rights, it is distinct from dowry death. Option D: None of the above - This is incorrect as Section 113B was specifically inserted by the Dowry Prohibition (Amendment) Act, 1986. Thus, Section 113B plays a crucial role in combating dowry-related deaths by strengthening the evidentiary presumption against the accused.

[#1505] Proving of hand writing is provided in Indian Evidence Act
Correct Answer

(D) A and B