Evidence Law (Indian Evidence Act & Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam)
Indian Evidence Act: Overview
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 governs the law of evidence in India, outlining what evidence is admissible in courts and how facts can be proved.
Key Concepts:
Fact: Something which is the case or not the case.
Relevant Fact: A fact connected to the fact in issue.
Fact in Issue: The fact which the court has to decide.
Proof: The establishment of a fact by evidence.
Types of Evidence: Oral, Documentary, and Circumstantial.
Important Case Laws with Detailed Explanation
1. Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1962 SC 1295)
Principle: Confession to a Police Officer
Facts: The accused was arrested and made a confession to a police officer. The question arose whether the confession was admissible.
Held: Under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, any confession made to a police officer is not admissible in evidence. The Supreme Court held that the confession made to a police officer cannot be used against the accused, as the law aims to prevent forced or coerced confessions.
Significance: This case reinforces the principle that confessions must be voluntary and cannot be extracted by police officers under duress.
2. State of U.P. v. Rajesh Gautam (2003 AIR SC 1267)
Principle: Dying Declaration
Facts: The victim was attacked and, before dying, made a statement identifying the attacker. The issue was whether this dying declaration was admissible and reliable.
Held: The Supreme Court held that a dying declaration is a relevant fact and can be the sole basis for conviction if it is voluntary, clear, and trustworthy. The court emphasized the principle that the declarant’s belief in impending death imparts special reliability to the statement.
Significance: This case underscores the evidentiary value of dying declarations in criminal cases, especially homicide.
3. Bharadwaj v. State of Madhya Pradesh (AIR 1974 SC 1449)
Principle: Relevancy of Electronic Records (Introduced later via amendments)
Facts: Though electronic records weren’t originally covered, this case dealt with the acceptance of records from new mediums as evidence.
Held: The Supreme Court acknowledged the need to include electronic records within the ambit of documentary evidence. This case paved the way for later amendments (Section 65A & 65B) dealing with electronic evidence.
Significance: A landmark in expanding the scope of evidence law to incorporate technological advances.
4. Tukaram S. Dighole v. State of Maharashtra (2010) 4 SCC 329
Principle: Circumstantial Evidence
Facts: The accused was convicted mainly on circumstantial evidence as there was no direct proof of crime.
Held: The Supreme Court clarified the principles governing circumstantial evidence — it must be complete, consistent, and lead only to the conclusion that the accused committed the crime. The chain of circumstances must be unbroken and exclude every hypothesis except the guilt of the accused.
Significance: This judgment is often cited for laying down the parameters of relying on circumstantial evidence for conviction.
5. Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P. (2014) 2 SCC 1
Principle: Duty to Register FIR
Facts: The case involved the obligation of police to register FIR when cognizable offenses are reported.
Held: The Supreme Court held that the police must register an FIR on receiving information about a cognizable offense and cannot refuse or delay it. The FIR is a crucial piece of evidence and a starting point in the criminal investigation.
Significance: This ruling ensures that the procedural right of victims is protected and that evidence is not lost due to police inaction.
Additional Important Points:
Section 3 of the Evidence Act: Defines relevant facts and their connection to the fact in issue.
Section 24: Inadmissibility of confessions caused by inducement, threat, or promise.
Section 65B: Admissibility of electronic records requires a certificate of authenticity.
RELATED Blog
0 comments