“Hearsay” is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.
evidence is only the material that can be used to prove the facts of the case, and its authenticity needs to be reviewed by the judicial authority. Only when the evidence itself is true can the true situation of the case be proved. False evidence will cause errors in the determination of the case. Therefore, this paragraph clearly stipulates that "the evidence must be verified to be true before it can be used as the basis for the verdict." This is the fundamental principle of the use of evidence. Violation of this principle will lead to wrong cases, false cases, indulgence of crimes or infringement of the legal rights of citizens.
And it is hereby enacted, that it shall be lawful for any Court within the Territories under the Government of the East India Company, and the several Judges thereof, in every Civil proceeding depending in such Court, upon the application of any of the parties to such proceeding, to order the examination, upon interrogatories or otherwise, before any Officer of and such Court, or other person
Evidence Act, 1872—Circumstantial evidence—Onus is on the prosecution to prove that chain is complete—There must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused.
Therefore, the mere fact that the patient suffered 92% burn injuries as in this case would not stand in the way of patient giving a dying declaration which otherwise inspires the confidence of the Court and is free from tutoring, and can be found reliable.
Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade and Another Vs State of Maharashtra (1973) 2 SCC 793 where the observations were made:
"Certainly, it is a primary principle that the accused must be and not merely may be guilty before a court can convict and the mental distance between 'may be' and must be' is long and divides vague conjectures from sure conclusions."
It is trite to say that the substantive evidence is the evidence of identification in Court. Apart from the clear provisions of S. 9 of the Evidence Act, the position in law is well settled by a catena of decisions of this Court. The facts, which establish the identity of the accused persons, are relevant under S.9 of the Evidence Act. As a general rule, the substantive evidence of a witness is the statement made in Court.
Civil Procedure Code, 1908—Order 18, Rule 17 read with Section 151—Recall of witness—Ideally, recording of evidence should be continuous, followed by arguments, without any gap—Courts should constantly endeavour to follow such time schedule—Amended Code expects them to do so—If that is done, applications for adjournments, re-opening, recalling, or interim measures could be avoided.
Anyone who claims a right has to establish the same and if the defendant, wishing to defend himself, claims something which may require evidence, it is he who must prove it.
Appreciation of evidence and burden of proof in election cases-In our country, election is a fairly costly and expensive venture and the Representation of People Act has provided sufficient safeguards to make the elections fair and free. In these circumstances, therefore, election results cannot be lightly brushed aside in election disputes.
A “statement” is: 1. An oral or written assertion; or 2. Nonverbal conduct of a person if it is intended by the person as an assertion. A “declarant” is a person who makes a statement. “Hearsay” is a statement, other than one…
When a witness uses a writing or other item to refresh memory while testifying, an adverse party is entitled to have such writing or other item produced at the hearing, to inspect it, to cross-examine the witness thereon, and to…