Illustrative Evidence - Law Dictionary Search Results
illustrative evidence
illustrative evidence see evidence ...
Soon before
Soon before, the expression 'soon before' is a relative term which requires to be construed in the context of specific circumstances of each case and no hard-and-fast rule of any universal application can be laid down by fixing any time-limit, Vidhya Devi v. State of Haryana, (2004) 9 SCC 476 (480). [Indian Penal Code, s. 304B; Evidence Act, 1872, s. 113B]Soon before, is a relative term which is required to be considered under specific circumstances of each case and no straight-jacket formula can be laid down by fixing any time-limit. This expression is pregnant with the idea of proximity test. The term 'soon before' is not synonymous with the term 'immediately before' and is opposite of the expression 'soon after' as used and understood in s. 114, Illustration (a) of the Evidence Act. These words would imply that the interval should not be too long between the time of making the statement and the death, Kans Raj v. State of Punjab, AIR 2000 SC 2324 (2332): (2000) 5 SCC 207. [Penal Cod...
Pertinent
Belonging or related to the subject or matter in hand fit or appropriate in any way adapted to the end proposed apposite material relevant as pertinent illustrations or arguments pertinent evidence...
Admitted
Admitted, means not admission of person whose signature is disputed in legal proceedings but it must be admission of person who claims that disputed signature was written by person by whom it purports to have been written and such person will signify to court that he has no objection if those sample signatures are compared with original one, Sunil Chowdhury v. Arup Kumar Ghosh, AIR 2006 Cal 109. [s. 73 and illustration (c) to s. 45 of Evidence Act, 1872]...
Evidence
Evidence, proof, either written or unwritten, of allegations in issue between parties.Something (including testimony, documents and tangible objects) that tends to prove or disprove the existence of an alleged fact, Black's Law Dictionary, 7th Edn., p. 575.The leading rules of evidence are the following:-(1) The sole object and end of evidence is to ascertain the truth of the several disputed facts or points in issue; and no evidence ought to be admitted which is not relevant to the issues. As to when evidence of collateral facts is admissible, see Hales v. Kerr, (1908) 2 KB 601; Butterley Co. v. New Hucknall Colliery Co., (1909) 1 Ch 37. As to acts showing a continuous course of conduct, see R. v. Mortimer, 25 Cr App Cas 150.(2) The point in issue is to be proved by the party who asserts the affirmative; according to the maxim affirmanti non neganti incumbit probatio. See BURDEN OF PROOF.(3) It will be sufficient to prove the substance of the issue.(4) The best evidence must be given ...
Circumstantial evidence
Circumstantial evidence, presumptive proof when the fact itself is not proved by direct testimony, but is to be inferred from circumstances, which either necessarily or usually attend such facts. It is obvious that a presumption is more or less likely to be true according as it is more or less probable that the circumstances would not have exited unless the fact which is inferred from them had also existed; and that a presumption can only be relied on until the contrary is actually proved. Circumstantial evidence has, in some instances, undoubtedly been found to produce a much stronger assurance of a prisoner's guilt than could have been produced by more direct and positive testimony. As a general principle, however, it is true that positive evidence of a fact from credible eye-witnesses is the most satisfactory that can be produced; and the universal feeling of mankind leans to this species of evidence in preference to that which is merely circumstantial. If positive evidence of a fac...
Fabricating false evidence
Fabricating false evidence, S. 192 (of IPC) defines compendiously the offence of fabricating false evidence. It reads thus:'Whoever causes any circumstances to exist... or makes any document containing a false statement intending that such circumstance..... or false statement may appear in evidence in a judicial proceeding..... and that such circumstance......... or false statement, so appearing in evidence, may cause any person who in such proceeding is to form an opinion upon the evidence, to entertain an erroneous opinion touching any point material to the result of such proceeding, is said to fabricate false evidence, Dr. S. Dutt v. State of U.P., AIR 1966 SC 523 (527): (1966) 1 SCR 493.Whoever causes any circumstance to exist or makes any false entry in any book or record, (or electronic record) or makes any document (or electronic record) containing a false statement, intending that such circumstance, false entry or false statement may appear in evidence in a judicial proceeding,...
Best evidence rule
Best evidence rule, is rule of evidence in order to prove what is said or pictured in a writing, recording, or photograph the original must be privileged unless the original is lost, destroyed, or otherwise, unobtainable, Webster's Dictionary of Law, Indian Edn. (2005), p. 49.Best evidence rule, is the rule when the judges and sages of the law have laid down that there is but one general rule of evidence, the best that the nature of the case will allow, Omychnd v. Barker, (1745) 1 Atk 21.Best evidence rule, means the rule requires in effect that the best or most direct evidence of a fact should be adduced or its absence accounted e.g. the best evidence of the existence of the contents of a letter i.e. its production in court. The rule no longer applies as the court admits all relevant evidence, Kajaal v. Nable, (1982) 75 Cr App 149....
Parol evidence
Parol evidence, testimony by the mouth of a witness. It is a general rule that oral evidence cannot be substituted for a written instrument, where the latter is required by law, or to give effect to a written instrument, defective in any particular essential to its validity; nor contradict, alter, or vary a written instrument, required by law, or agreed upon by the parties, as the authentic memorial of the facts which it recites. But parol evidence is admissible to defeat a written instrument on the ground of fraud, mistake, etc., or to apply it to its proper subject, or, in some instances, as ancillary to such application to explain the meaning of doubtful terms, or to rebut presumptions arising extrinsically. In these cases the parol evidence does not usurp the place of written evidence, but either shows that the instrument ought not to be allowed to operate at all, or is essential in order to give to the instrument its legal effect.The general rule with regard to the admission of pa...
Criminal Evidence Act
Criminal Evidence Act, 1898 (English) (61 & 62 Vict. c. 36), the general Act by which every person charged with an offence and his or her wife or husband became a competent, but not a compellable, witness for the defence at every stage of the proceedings.The Evidence Acts, 1851 and 1853, whichmade parties and spouses admissible witnesses (they having been previously incompetent on the groundof interest), expressly excepted criminal proceedings from its opertion; but a series of enactments dealing with particular offences, from the Licensing Act, 1872, downto the Chaff Cutting Machines Accidents Act, 1897 (of which s. 20 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885, was by far the most important), did away with this exception, in particular cases and in varying phraseology, but without qualifications except that against compellability, and enabled accused persons to give evidenceon oath in their own defence.The Act of 1898, superseding [see Charnock v. Merchant, (1900) 1 QB 474] but not expr...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »