Relevancy and Admissibility
Relevancy and Admissibility: What Do They Mean?
Relevancy: Whether the evidence relates directly or indirectly to a fact in issue in the case. Evidence must be relevant to be considered.
Admissibility: Even if evidence is relevant, it must meet legal standards to be admitted in court. Some relevant evidence can be excluded for reasons like being hearsay, prejudicial, or obtained illegally.
In the Context of Pakala Narayana Swami v King Emperor
Though the full judgment text is not readily accessible, the case is often cited regarding how courts determine what evidence can be considered in criminal trials.
Key points on relevancy and admissibility in the case:
Relevancy of Evidence:
The court examined whether the evidence presented by the prosecution was directly connected to proving the defendant’s guilt. The focus was on whether the evidence tended to make the existence of a fact in issue more or less probable.
Admissibility Criteria:
Even relevant evidence must satisfy certain rules before admission. For example, evidence obtained unlawfully or that was hearsay might be excluded.
Discretion of the Court:
The court held that it has discretion to exclude relevant evidence if it is unfairly prejudicial or unreliable.
Effect on the Trial Outcome:
The decision highlighted how improperly admitted evidence could lead to unsafe convictions, thus courts must carefully assess both relevancy and admissibility.
Why is this Important?
The case underscores the importance of filtering evidence to ensure a fair trial.
It clarifies the role of courts in balancing the probative value of evidence against possible unfair prejudice.
It influences how evidence law developed in Malayan (and later Malaysian) courts, particularly under the colonial legal framework.
Summary:
| Aspect | Explanation | Relevance to Case |
|---|---|---|
| Relevancy | Evidence must relate to a fact in issue | Court examined if evidence was relevant to the charge |
| Admissibility | Evidence must comply with legal rules to be admitted | Court scrutinized if evidence met standards for admission |
| Court Discretion | Courts can exclude evidence even if relevant | Court exercised discretion to exclude unfairly prejudicial evidence |
| Fair Trial | Proper evidence rules safeguard fairness in criminal trial | Prevents unsafe convictions and ensures justice |
Do write to us if you need any further assistance.
RELATED Blog
0 comments