INTENTION V ACCIDENT

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR LAWYER: 13. When there is a question whether an act was accidental or intentional, or done with a particular knowledge or intention, the fact that such act formed part of a series of similar occurrences, in each of which the person doing the act was concerned, is relevant. Illustrations. (a) A is accused of burning down his house in order to obtain money for which it is insured. The facts that A lived in several houses successively each of which he insured, in each of which a fire occurred, and after each of which fires A received payment from a different insurance company, are relevant, as tending to show that the fires were not accidental. (b) Ais employed to receive money from the debtors of B. It is A's duty to make entries in a book showing the amounts received by him. He makes an entry showing that on a particular occasion he received less than he really did receive. The question is, whether this false entry was accidental or intentional. The facts that other entries made by A in the same book are false, and that the false entry is in each case in favour of A, are relevant. (c) A is accused of fraudulently delivering to B a counterfeit currency. The question is, whether the delivery of the currency was accidental. The facts that, soon before or soon after the delivery to B, A delivered counterfeit currency to C, D and E are relevant, as showing that the delivery to B was not accidental.

Action Points for Lawyer

Assess Pattern of Behavior:
- When determining if an act was accidental or intentional, look for patterns of similar actions involving the accused.
Gather Evidence of Repeated Incidents:
- Investigate past occurrences involving similar actions to establish a series of events. E.g., if the accused is involved in multiple insurance claims for fires or fraudulent activities, such facts are relevant.
Use of Similar Facts for Intentionality:
- Highlight any evidence showing repeated conduct by the accused in similar situations to argue intent or knowledge behind the act.
Illustrate through Examples:
- In cases like insurance fraud or false financial entries, show how previous related incidents (e.g., previous insurance claims or false entries in favor of the accused) establish a pattern of intentionality.
Present Evidence of Recurrence:
- Provide evidence of recurrence of the act (such as delivering counterfeit currency to multiple individuals) to argue that the act in question was not accidental.
Link to Intent or Knowledge:
- Ensure that the recurring actions link directly to the knowledge or intention behind the act in question.

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR LAWYER: 14. When there is a question whether a particular act was done, the existence of any course of business, according to which it naturally would have been done, is a relevant fact. Illustrations. (a) The question is, whether a particular letter was dispatched. The facts that it was the ordinary course of business for all letters put in a certain place to be carried to the post, and that particular letter was put in that place are relevant. (b) The question is, whether a particular letter reached A. The facts that it was posted in due course, and was not returned through the Return Letter Office, are relevant.

Action Points for Lawyer

Establish Business Routine:
- Determine if there is an established course of business or procedure that would make it likely the act was done. This routine is a relevant factor in proving or disproving the act.
Examine Evidence of Standard Practices:
- Gather evidence of regular business practices that support the likelihood of the act being completed. For instance, if letters are typically dispatched or posted in a specific manner, this can indicate whether a particular letter was sent.
Rely on Consistency with Routine:
- Highlight the fact that the act in question (e.g., dispatching or receiving a letter) fits within the standard operating procedures, reinforcing the probability that it occurred.
Present Supporting Facts:
- Use supporting details like the letter not being returned by the postal office or the letter being placed in the designated spot for dispatch to strengthen the case for the act being done.
Leverage Business Documentation:
- Where applicable, present records or documentation showing that routine procedures were followed in the instance in question, increasing the credibility of the claim.
Reinforce Non-Accidental Nature:
- Argue that deviations from routine or the absence of any return of the letter suggest that the act (like delivery or dispatch) was indeed carried out as expected.

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR A LAWYER: 15. An admission is a statement, oral or documentary or contained in electronic form, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned 16. (1) Statements made by a party to the proceeding, or by an agent to any such party, whom the Court regards, under the circumstances of the case, as expressly or impliedly authorised by him to make them, are admissions. (2) Statements made by— (i) parties to suits suing or sued in a representative character, are not admissions, unless they were made while the party making them held that character; or (ii) (a) persons who have any proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject matter of the proceeding, and who make the statement in their character of persons so interested; or (b) persons from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest in the subject matter of the suit, are admissions, if they are made during the continuance of the interest of the persons making the statements. 17. Statements made by persons whose position or liability, it is necessary to prove as against any party to the suit, are admissions, if such statements would be relevant as against such persons in relation to such position or liability in a suit brought by or against them, and if they are made whilst the person making them occupies such position or is subject to such liability. Illustration. A undertakes to collect rents for B. B sues A for not collecting rent due from C to B. A denies that rent was due from C to B. A statement by C that he owed B rent is an admission, and is a relevant fact as against A, if A denies that C did owe rent to B. 18. Statements made by persons to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in reference to a matter in dispute are admissions. Illustration. The question is, whether a horse sold by A to B is sound. A says to B—"Go and ask C, C knows all about it". C's statement is an admission. 19. Admissions are relevant and may be proved as against the person who makes them, or his representative in interest; but they cannot be proved by or on behalf of the person who makes them or by his representative in interest, except in the following cases, namely:— (1) an admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, when it is of such a nature that, if the person making it were dead, it would be relevant as between third persons under section 26; (2) an admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, when it consists of a statement of the existence of any state of mind or body, relevant or in issue, made at or about the time when such state of mind or body existed, and is accompanied by conduct rendering its falsehood improbable; (3) an admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, if it is relevant otherwise than as an admission. Illustrations. (a) The question between A and B is, whether a certain deed is or is not forged. A affirms that it is genuine, B that it is forged. A may prove a statement by B that the deed is genuine, and B may prove a statement by A that deed is forged; but A cannot prove a statement by himself that the deed is genuine, nor can B prove a statement by himself that the deed is forged. (b) A, the captain of a ship, is tried for casting her away. Evidence is given to show that the ship was taken out of her proper course. A produces a book kept by him in the ordinary course of his business showing observations alleged to have been taken by him from day to day, and indicating that the ship was not taken out of her proper course. A may prove these statements, because they would be admissible between third parties, if he were dead, under clause (b) of section 26. (c) A is accused of a crime committed by him at Kolkata. He produces a letter written by himself and dated at Chennai on that day, and bearing the Chennai post-mark of that day. The statement in the date of the letter is admissible, because, if A were dead, it would be admissible under clause (b) of section 26. (d) A is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. He offers to prove that he refused to sell them below their value. A may prove these statements, though they are admissions, because they are explanatory of conduct influenced by facts in issue. (e) A is accused of fraudulently having in his possession counterfeit currency which he knew to be counterfeit. He offers to prove that he asked a skilful person to examine the currency as he doubted whether it was counterfeit or not, and that person did examine it and told him it was genuine. A may prove these facts. 20. Oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant, unless and until the party proposing to prove them shows that he is entitled to give secondary evidence of the contents of such document under the rules hereinafter contained, or unless the genuineness of a document produced is in question. 21. In civil cases no admission is relevant, if it is made either upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be given, or under circumstances from which the Court can infer that the parties agreed together that evidence of it should not be given. Explanation.—Nothing in this section shall be taken to exempt any advocate from giving evidence of any matter of which he may be compelled to give evidence under sub-sections (1) and (2) of section 132. 22. A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding, if the making of the confession appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement, threat, coercion or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to him reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him: Provided that if the confession is made after the impression caused by any such inducement, threat, coercion or promise has, in the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant: Provided further that if such a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, or in consequence of a deception practised on the accused person for the purpose of obtaining it, or when he was drunk, or because it was made in answer to questions which he need not have answered, whatever may have been the form of those questions, or because he was not warned that he was not bound to make such confession, and that evidence of it might be given against him. 23. (1) No confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence. (2) No confession made by any person while he is in the custody of a police officer, unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate shall be proved against him: Provided that when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact discovered, may be proved. 24. When more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of such persons is proved, the Court may take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well as against the person who makes such confession. Explanation I.—"Offence", as used in this section, includes the abetment of, or attempt to commit, the offence. Explanation II.—A trial of more persons than one held in the absence of the accused who has absconded or who fails to comply with a proclamation issued under section 84 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall be deemed to be a joint trial for the purpose of this section. Illustrations. (a) A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. It is proved that A said—"B and I murdered C". The Court may consider the effect of this confession as against B. (b) Ais on his trial for the murder of C. There is evidence to show that C was murdered by A and B, and that B said—"A and I murdered C". This statement may not be taken into consideration by the Court against A, as B is not being jointly tried. 25. Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted but they may operate as estoppels under the provisions hereinafter contained.

Action Points for Lawyer

Definition of Admission:
- Understand that an admission includes any statement (oral, documentary, or electronic) that suggests an inference relevant to the case.
Statements by Party or Agent:
- Consider statements made by the party to the proceedings or their authorized agent as admissions. Ensure the court views the agent as expressly or impliedly authorized to make such statements.
Statements by Interested Persons:
- Identify statements made by persons with proprietary or pecuniary interest in the case, or those from whom a party derives their interest. These are admissions if made during the time of the person's interest.
Statements by Liable Persons:
- Use statements made by individuals whose position or liability is relevant to the case. These admissions must be relevant to their liability and made while occupying that position.
Referrals for Information:
- When a party refers to another person for information on a matter in dispute, the referred person’s statements are considered admissions.
Relevance and Use of Admissions:
- Admissions can be used against the person who made them but cannot be used by the person making them, except under specific conditions (e.g., if the person making it were dead, or if it explains conduct).
Oral Admissions of Document Contents:
- Oral admissions about a document’s content are not relevant unless secondary evidence rules allow it, or the genuineness of the document is questioned.
Civil Case Admissions:
- In civil cases, an admission is not relevant if made under an agreement that it cannot be used as evidence, unless compelled under law (e.g., Sections 132(1) and (2)).
Confession Admissibility:
- Confessions made under inducement, threat, or coercion are inadmissible. However, if the coercion is removed or if the confession remains relevant otherwise, it can be admitted. Confessions made in the presence of a magistrate during police custody can also be admissible.
Confessions to Police Officers:
- Confessions made to police officers, or during police custody without a magistrate present, cannot be used against the accused, except for discoveries made as a result of the confession.
Joint Trials and Confessions:
- In joint trials, a confession made by one accused can be considered against both the confessing person and the co-accused, but only if they are being tried together.
Admissions as Estoppel:
- While admissions are not conclusive proof, they may create estoppel, preventing the party from contradicting the admission in certain circumstances.

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR A LAWYER: Statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses 26. Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which under the circumstances of the case appears to the Court unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases, namely:— (a) when the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that person's death comes into question. Such statements are relevant whether the person who made them was or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question; (b) when the statement was made by such person in the ordinary course of business, and in particular when it consists of any entry or memorandum made by him in books kept in the ordinary course of business, or in the discharge of professional duty; or of an acknowledgement written or signed by him of the receipt of money, goods, securities or property of any kind; or of a document used in commerce written or signed by him; or of the date of a letter or other document usually dated, written or signed by him; (c) when the statement is against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the person making it, or when, if true, it would expose him or would have exposed him to a criminal prosecution or to a suit for damages; (d) when the statement gives the opinion of any such person, as to the existence of any public right or custom or matter of public or general interest, of the existence of which, if it existed, he would have been likely to be aware, and when such statement was made before any controversy as to such right, custom or matter had arisen; (e) when the statement relates to the existence of any relationship by blood, marriage or adoption between persons as to whose relationship by blood, marriage or adoption the person making the statement had special means of knowledge, and when the statement was made before the question in dispute was raised; (f) when the statement relates to the existence of any relationship by blood, marriage or adoption between persons deceased, and is made in any will or deed relating to the affairs of the family to which any such deceased person belonged, or in any family pedigree, or upon any tombstone, family portrait or other thing on which such statements are usually made, and when such statement was made before the question in dispute was raised; (g) when the statement is contained in any deed, will or other document which relates to any such transaction as is specified in clause (a) of section 11; (h) when the statement was made by a number of persons, and expressed feelings or impressions on their part relevant to the matter in question. Illustrations. (a) The question is, whether A was murdered by B; or A dies of injuries received in a transaction in the course of which she was raped. The question is whether she was raped by B; or the question is, whether A was killed by B under such circumstances that a suit would lie against B by A's widow. Statements made by A as to the cause of his or her death, referring respectively to the murder, the rape and the actionable wrong under consideration, are relevant facts. (b) The question is as to the date of A's birth. An entry in the diary of a deceased surgeon regularly kept in the course of business, stating that, on a given day he attended A's mother and delivered her of a son, is a relevant fact. (c) The question is, whether A was in Nagpur on a given day. A statement in the diary of a deceased solicitor, regularly kept in the course of business, that on a given day the solicitor attended A at a place mentioned, in Nagpur, for the purpose of conferring with him upon specified business, is a relevant fact. (d) The question is, whether a ship sailed from Mumbai harbour on a given day. A letter written by a deceased member of a merchant's firm by which she was chartered to their correspondents in Chennai, to whom the cargo was consigned, stating that the ship sailed on a given day from Mumbai port, is a relevant fact. (e) The question is, whether rent was paid to A for certain land. A letter from A's deceased agent to A, saying that he had received the rent on A's account and held it at A's orders is a relevant fact. (f) The question is, whether A and B were legally married. The statement of a deceased clergyman that he married them under such circumstances that the celebration would be a crime is relevant. (g) The question is, whether A, a person who cannot be found, wrote a letter on a certain day. The fact that a letter written by him is dated on that day is relevant. (h) The question is, what was the cause of the wreck of a ship. A protest made by the captain, whose attendance cannot be procured, is a relevant fact. (i) The question is, whether a given road is a public way. A statement by A, a deceased headman of the village, that the road was public, is a relevant fact. (j) The question is, what was the price of grain on a certain day in a particular market. A statement of the price, made by a deceased business person in the ordinary course of his business, is a relevant fact. (k) The question is, whether A, who is dead, was the father of B. A statement byA that B was his son, is a relevant fact. (l) The question is, what was the date of the birth of A. A letter from A's deceased father to a friend, announcing the birth of A on a given day, is a relevant fact. (m) The question is, whether, and when, A and B were married. An entry in a memorandum book by C, the deceased father of B, of his daughter's marriage with A on a given date, is a relevant fact. (n) A sues B for a libel expressed in a painted caricature exposed in a shop window. The question is as to the similarity of the caricature and its libellous character. The remarks of a crowd of spectators on these points may be proved

Action Points for Lawyer: Statements by Persons Who Cannot Be Called as Witnesses

Admissibility of Statements:
- Statements made by a person who is dead, missing, incapacitated, or whose presence cannot be secured without unreasonable delay or expense are admissible in certain cases.
Cause of Death:
- Statements related to the cause of death or circumstances leading to the death are admissible, regardless of whether the person making the statement expected to die.
Statements Made in Ordinary Course of Business:
- Entries, memoranda, acknowledgments, or other business-related documents made in the ordinary course of business are relevant, even if the person is unavailable.
Statements Against Interest:
- Statements against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the declarant, or that expose the declarant to criminal or civil liability, are relevant.
Statements Regarding Public Rights or Customs:
- Deceased persons' opinions on public rights, customs, or matters of general interest made before any controversy arose are relevant.
Statements Regarding Family Relationships:
- Statements related to family relationships (e.g., blood, marriage, adoption) made by a person with special knowledge or documented in family records are relevant.
Statements in Legal Documents:
- Statements in deeds, wills, or similar documents related to the deceased person's affairs or family are admissible.
Group Expressions of Feelings:
- Statements made by multiple people expressing relevant feelings or impressions are admissible.
Examples of Admissible Statements:
- Cause of death (e.g., murder, rape).
- Business records (e.g., diary entries, letters).
- Family relations (e.g., declarations about parentage, marriage).
- Public or general interest statements (e.g., road being public, market prices).
- Statements related to legal matters (e.g., libel in caricature).
Relevance of Statements in Disputed Matters:
- Use statements where relevant facts pertain to the case and the person making the statement is unavailable as a witness, applying the specific scenarios mentioned.

### Witnesses 1. **Admissibility of Statem**

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR A LAWYER: 27. Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable: Provided that the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest; that the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine and the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding. Explanation.—A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of this section.

Action Points for Lawyer: Use of Previous Witness Evidence

Admissibility of Previous Testimony:
- Evidence given by a witness in a prior judicial proceeding can be used in a subsequent proceeding or a later stage of the same proceeding if the witness is unavailable (e.g., dead, missing, incapacitated, or kept away by the adverse party).
Conditions for Use:
- The previous proceeding must have involved the same parties or their representatives.
- The adverse party must have had the right and opportunity to cross-examine the witness in the first proceeding.
- The issues in both proceedings must be substantially the same.
When Witness is Unavailable:
- The court may allow the use of earlier evidence if obtaining the witness's presence involves unreasonable delay or expense, or if they cannot be located.
Criminal Proceedings:
- A criminal trial or inquiry is considered a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused for the purposes of using previous witness testimony.
Cross-Examination Requirement:
- Ensure that in the earlier proceeding, the opposing party had a fair opportunity to cross-examine the witness, as this is crucial for admissibility in a later case.
Unreasonable Delay or Expense:
- Argue for the relevance of prior testimony if calling the witness again would result in unreasonable costs or delays.

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR A LAWYER: S.39- Opinion of Experts, Opinions of third persons when relevant 39. (1) When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science or art, or any other field, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or any other field, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts and such persons are called experts. Illustrations. (a) The question is, whether the death of A was caused by poison. The opinions of experts as to the symptoms produced by the poison by which A is supposed to have died, are relevant. (b) The question is, whether A, at the time of doing a certain act, was, by reason of unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law. The opinions of experts upon the question whether the symptoms exhibited by A commonly show unsoundness of mind, and whether such unsoundness of mind usually renders persons incapable of knowing the nature of the acts which they do, or of knowing that what they do is either wrong or contrary to law, are relevant. (c) The question is, whether a certain document was written by A. Another document is produced which is proved or admitted to have been written by A. The opinions of experts on the question whether the two documents were written by the same person or by different persons, are relevant. (2) When in a proceeding, the court has to form an opinion on any matter relating to any information transmitted or stored in any computer resource or any other electronic or digital form, the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence referred to in section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, is a relevant fact. Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section, an Examiner of Electronic Evidence shall be an expert.

Action Points for Lawyer: Expert Opinion and Relevance

Engage Experts for Specialized Opinions:
- When the court needs to form an opinion on matters of foreign law, science, art, or identity of handwriting or fingerprints, opinions of persons with special skills in those fields (experts) are relevant.
Use Experts for Technical Subjects:
- If a case involves technical issues like handwriting analysis, poison symptoms, or mental health, seek expert testimony to establish relevant facts.
Illustrations of Expert Use:
- Expert opinions are relevant in cases involving:
  - Cause of death by poison (e.g., toxicology experts).
  - Mental capacity of a person when committing an act (e.g., psychological experts).
  - Comparison of handwriting or documents (e.g., handwriting experts).
Digital and Electronic Evidence:
- For matters involving electronic data or information stored in computer resources, consult an Examiner of Electronic Evidence under section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Their opinion is considered relevant expert evidence.
Ensure Expert Qualifications:
- Verify that the expert being used has the necessary credentials and expertise in the relevant subject matter.
Electronic Examiner as Expert:
- In cases involving digital or electronic evidence, the Examiner of Electronic Evidence is legally recognized as an expert. Engage them where electronic information is critical to the case.
Strengthen Case with Expert Testimony:
- Utilize expert testimony to support critical aspects of the case where specialized knowledge is required to influence the court's opinion.

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR A LAWYER: S.57- Primary Evidence, 57. Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court. Explanation 1.—Where a document is executed in several parts, each part is primary evidence of the document. Explanation 2.—Where a document is executed in counterpart, each counterpart being executed by one or some of the parties only, each counterpart is primary evidence as against the parties executing it. Explanation 3.—Where a number of documents are all made by one uniform process, as in the case of printing, lithography or photography, each is primary evidence of the contents of the rest; but, where they are all copies of a common original, they are not primary evidence of the contents of the original Explanation 4.—Where an electronic or digital record is created or stored, and such storage occurs simultaneously or sequentially in multiple files, each such file is primary evidence. Explanation 5.—Where an electronic or digital record is produced from proper custody, such electronic and digital record is primary evidence unless it is disputed. Explanation 6.—Where a video recording is simultaneously stored in electronic form and transmitted or broadcast or transferred to another, each of the stored recordings is primary evidence. Explanation 7.—Where an electronic or digital record is stored in multiple storage spaces in a computer resource, each such automated storage, including temporary files, is primary evidence. Illustration. A person is shown to have been in possession of a number of placards, all printed at one time from one original. Any one of the placards is primary evidence of the contents of any other, but no one of them is primary evidence of the contents of the original.

Action Points for Lawyer: Primary Evidence (Section 57)

Primary Evidence is the Original Document:
- Always present the original document in court for inspection when possible, as it constitutes primary evidence.
Multiple Parts of a Document:
- If a document is executed in several parts (e.g., contracts), each part is considered primary evidence of the entire document.
Counterparts of a Document:
- When a document is executed in counterparts, each counterpart signed by one or more parties is primary evidence for those parties.
Printed, Lithographed, or Photographed Documents:
- Documents produced by a uniform process (e.g., printing, lithography, or photography) are primary evidence of one another, but not of the original if they are copies.
Electronic or Digital Records:
- Digital records stored or created simultaneously or sequentially across multiple files are all considered primary evidence.
- Properly stored electronic records are primary evidence unless their authenticity is disputed.
Video Recordings and Digital Evidence:
- When video recordings are simultaneously stored and transmitted, each version is treated as primary evidence.
Automated Digital Storage:
- Files stored automatically in multiple locations (including temporary files) within a computer system are considered primary evidence.
Apply Proper Custody Rules for Digital Records:
- Ensure that electronic or digital records presented in court come from proper custody to avoid disputes over their status as primary evidence.
Illustration Application:
- When a large number of printed items are made from a single original (e.g., placards), each printed item is primary evidence of other similar items but not of the original document.

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR A LAWYER: S.58- Secondary Evidence, 58. Secondary evidence includes— (i) certified copies given under the provisions hereinafter contained; (ii) copies made from the original by mechanical processes which in themselves ensure the accuracy of the copy, and copies compared with such copies; (iii) copies made from or compared with the original; (iv) counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not execute them; (v) oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself seen it; (vi) oral admissions; (vii) written admissions; (viii) evidence of a person who has examined a document, the original of which consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot conveniently be examined in Court, and who is skilled in the examination of such documents. Illustrations. (a) A photograph of an original is secondary evidence of its contents, though the two have not been compared, if it is proved that the thing photographed was the original. (b) A copy compared with a copy of a letter made by a copying machine is secondary evidence of the contents of the letter, if it is shown that the copy made by the copying machine was made from the original. (c) A copy transcribed from a copy, but afterwards compared with the original, is secondary evidence; but the copy not so compared is not secondary evidence of the original, although the copy from which it was transcribed was compared with the original. (d) Neither an oral account of a copy compared with the original, nor an oral account of a photograph or machine-copy of the original, is secondary evidence of the original.

Action Points for Lawyer: Secondary Evidence (Section 58)

Use Certified Copies:
- Certified copies given under legal provisions are valid secondary evidence.
Mechanical Copies:
- Copies made by mechanical processes (e.g., photocopying, scanning) that ensure accuracy are considered secondary evidence, as are copies compared with such mechanical copies.
Copies Compared with Original:
- Copies made from or compared with the original document are admissible as secondary evidence.
Counterparts Against Non-Executing Parties:
- Use counterparts of documents as secondary evidence against parties who did not execute them.
Oral Accounts:
- Oral accounts of a document’s contents by a person who has personally seen the original can serve as secondary evidence.
Oral and Written Admissions:
- Both oral and written admissions about the contents of a document are valid secondary evidence.
Expert Testimony for Numerous Documents:
- In cases involving numerous accounts or documents, evidence from an expert who has examined them can be used as secondary evidence when the original cannot be conveniently examined in court.
Photographs as Secondary Evidence:
- A photograph of an original document is secondary evidence if it can be proven that the object photographed was indeed the original.
Machine-Copied Documents:
- A copy made from a mechanical process (e.g., copying machine) can be secondary evidence if shown to be based on the original.
Transcribed and Compared Copies:

A copy transcribed from another copy but subsequently compared with the original is secondary evidence. However, a copy not compared with the original is not valid as secondary evidence.

Oral Accounts of Copies:

Oral accounts of copies compared with the original or oral accounts of photographs/machine copies of the original are not valid secondary evidence.

By following these guidelines, secondary evidence can be effectively utilized in cases where primary evidence is unavailable.

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR A LAWYER: S.63- Admissibility of Electronic Records, 62. The contents of electronic records may be proved in accordance with the provisions of section 63. 63. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Adhiniyam, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media or semiconductor memory which is produced by a computer or any communication device or otherwise stored, recorded or copied in any electronic form (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceedings, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence or any contents of the original or of any fact stated therein of which direct evidence would be admissible. (2) The conditions referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of a computer output shall be the following, namely:— (a) the computer output containing the information was produced by the computer or communication device during the period over which the computer or communication device was used regularly to create, store or process information for the purposes of any activity regularly carried on over that period by the person having lawful control over the use of the computer or communication device; (b) during the said period, information of the kind contained in the electronic record or of the kind from which the information so contained is derived was regularly fed into the computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities; (c) throughout the material part of the said period, the computer or communication device was operating properly or, if not, then in respect of any period in which it was not operating properly or was out of operation during that part of the period, was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents; and (d) the information contained in the electronic record reproduces or is derived from such information fed into the computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities. (3) Where over any period, the function of creating, storing or processing information for the purposes of any activity regularly carried on over that period as mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (2) was regularly performed by means of one or more computers or communication device, whether— (a) in standalone mode; or (b) on a computer system; or (c) on a computer network; or (d) on a computer resource enabling information creation or providing information processing and storage; or (e) through an intermediary, all the computers or communication devices used for that purpose during that period shall be treated for the purposes of this section as constituting a single computer or communication device; and references in this section to a computer or communication device shall be construed accordingly. (4) In any proceeding where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things shall be submitted along with the electronic record at each instance where it is being submitted for admission, namely:— (a) identifying the electronic record containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was produced; (b) giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic record as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record was produced by a computer or a communication device referred to in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (3); (c) dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2) relate, and purporting to be signed by a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) and an expert shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate; and for the purposes of this sub-section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it in the certificate specified in the Schedule (5) For the purposes of this section,— (a) information shall be taken to be supplied to a computer or communication device if it is supplied thereto in any appropriate form and whether it is so supplied directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment; (b) a computer output shall be taken to have been produced by a computer or communication device whether it was produced by it directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment or by other electronic means as referred to in clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (3)

Action Points for Lawyer: Admissibility of Electronic Records (Section 63)

Electronic Records as Documents:
- Any information contained in electronic records (e.g., printed, stored, recorded, or copied) is admissible as a document if specific conditions are met, without the need for producing the original.
Conditions for Admissibility:
- Ensure the electronic record meets these conditions:
  - The computer or communication device was used regularly during the period to create, store, or process information.
  - The information in the electronic record was fed into the device during the ordinary course of activities.
  - The device was operating properly during the material period, and any malfunction did not affect the record's accuracy.
  - The electronic record contains or derives information fed into the computer in the ordinary course of activities.
Multiple Devices:
- If multiple computers or communication devices were used during the relevant period (standalone, networked, intermediary), they are treated as a single system for evidentiary purposes.
Certification Requirement:
- A certificate must be submitted with the electronic record. The certificate must:
  - Identify the electronic record and describe how it was produced.
  - Provide details of the device involved in its production.
  - Address the conditions mentioned in Section 63(2) (proper operation, information input, etc.).
  - Be signed by the person in charge of the device or system.
Content of the Certificate:
- The certificate must reflect the best knowledge and belief of the person providing it, ensuring compliance with the statutory conditions.
Supply of Information to Computer:
- Information is deemed to be supplied to the computer or device directly or through human intervention using appropriate equipment.
Computer Output:
- A computer output (i.e., printed or stored record) is valid whether produced directly by the computer or through other electronic means.

By ensuring that electronic records meet these criteria and are supported by the required certification, they can be effectively admitted as evidence in court proceedings.

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR A LAWYER: 141 141. (1) When either party proposes to give evidence of any fact, the Judge may ask the party proposing to give the evidence in what manner the alleged fact, if proved, would be relevant; and the Judge shall admit the evidence if he thinks that the fact, if proved, would be relevant, and not otherwise. (2) If the fact proposed to be proved is one of which evidence is admissible only upon proof of some other fact, such last mentioned fact must be proved before evidence is given of the fact first mentioned, unless the party undertakes to give proof of such fact, and the Court is satisfied with such undertaking. (3) If the relevancy of one alleged fact depends upon another alleged fact being first proved, the Judge may, in his discretion, either permit evidence of the first fact to be given before the second fact is proved, or require evidence to be given of the second fact before evidence is given of the first fact. Illustrations. (a) It is proposed to prove a statement about a relevant fact by a person alleged to be dead, which statement is relevant under section 26. The fact that the person is dead must be proved by the person proposing to prove the statement, before evidence is given of the statement. (b) It is proposed to prove, by a copy, the contents of a document said to be lost. The fact that the original is lost must be proved by the person proposing to produce the copy, before the copy is produced. (c) A is accused of receiving stolen property knowing it to have been stolen. It is proposed to prove that he denied the possession of the property. The relevancy of the denial depends on the identity of the property. The Court may, in its discretion, either require the property to be identified before the denial of the possession is proved, or permit the denial of the possession to be proved before the property is identified. (d) It is proposed to prove a fact A which is said to have been the cause or effect of a fact in issue. There are several intermediate facts B, C and D which must be shown to exist before the fact A can be regarded as the cause or effect of the fact in issue. The Court may either permit A to be proved before B, C or D is proved, or may require proof of B, C and D before permitting proof of A.

Action Points for Lawyer: Section 141 (Order of Proof and Relevance of Evidence)

Judicial Inquiry on Relevance:
- If a party proposes to give evidence of a fact, the judge can ask how the fact, if proved, would be relevant to the case. The judge will admit the evidence only if it is deemed relevant.
Proof of Preceding Facts:
- When the admissibility of one fact relies on proving another, the first fact can only be introduced after proving the second one. However, the court may accept an undertaking from the party to prove the dependent fact later.
Discretion on Order of Proof:
- The judge has the discretion to either:
  - Allow evidence of the first fact before proving the second, or
  - Require the second fact to be proved first before allowing the first fact to be introduced.
Examples of Sequential Proof:
- Statement by Deceased Person: If you are proving a statement by a deceased person, you must first prove the death before presenting the statement.
- Lost Document: If using a copy of a lost document, prove that the original document is lost before introducing the copy as evidence.
- Receiving Stolen Property: If accused of receiving stolen property, prove the identity of the property before introducing evidence of a denial of possession.
- Intermediate Facts: If a fact (A) is said to be the cause or effect of the fact in issue, intermediate facts (B, C, D) must be shown to exist before proving fact A. However, the court may allow flexibility in the order of proving these facts.

By ensuring proper relevance and proving dependent facts as required by the judge, you can effectively navigate the admission of evidence in court.

SUMMARISE INTO ACTION POINTS FOR A LAWYER: S.158- Impeaching credit of witness, 158. The credit of a witness may be impeached in the following ways by the adverse party, or, with the consent of the Court, by the party who calls him— (a) by the evidence of persons who testify that they, from their knowledge of the witness, believe him to be unworthy of credit; (b) by proof that the witness has been bribed, or has accepted the offer of a bribe, or has received any other corrupt inducement to give his evidence; (c) by proof of former statements inconsistent with any part of his evidence which is liable to be contradicted. Explanation.—A witness declaring another witness to be unworthy of credit may not, upon his examination-in-chief, give reasons for his belief, but he may be asked his reasons in cross-examination, and the answers which he gives cannot be contradicted, though, if they are false, he may afterwards be charged with giving false evidence. Illustrations. (a) A sues B for the price of goods sold and delivered to B. C says that he delivered the goods to B. Evidence is offered to show that, on a previous occasion, he said that he had not delivered goods to B. The evidence is admissible. (b) A is accused of the murder of B. C says that B, when dying, declared that A had given B the wound of which he died. Evidence is offered to show that, on a previous occasion, C said that B, when dying, did not declare that A had given B the wound of which he died. The evidence is admissible

Action Points for Lawyer: Section 158 (Impeaching the Credibility of Witnesses)

Methods to Impeach Witness Credibility:
- Testimony of Others: Present evidence from individuals who can testify that they believe the witness is unworthy of credit based on their knowledge of the witness.
- Proof of Corruption: Introduce evidence that the witness has been bribed, accepted a bribe, or received any corrupt inducement to provide testimony.
- Inconsistent Statements: Provide proof of previous statements made by the witness that are inconsistent with their current testimony and are subject to contradiction.
Limitations on Witness Credibility:
- A witness declaring another as unworthy of credit cannot provide reasons for their belief during direct examination (examination-in-chief). However, they may be asked to explain their reasons during cross-examination.
Consequences for False Statements:
- If the reasons given by a witness in cross-examination are found to be false, the witness can be charged with giving false evidence.
Illustrative Examples:
- Contradicting Testimony: If a witness (C) claims to have delivered goods to a party (B), evidence showing that C previously stated they did not deliver goods to B can be used to impeach C's credibility.
- Contradicting Dying Declarations: In a murder case, if a witness (C) testifies that a dying person (B) declared the accused (A) caused their fatal injury, evidence that C previously claimed B did not make such a declaration is admissible.

By utilizing these strategies, you can effectively challenge the credibility of witnesses in court, thereby strengthening your case.

SUMMARISE: S. 165- Production of Documents 165. (1) A witness summoned to produce a document shall, if it is in his possession or power, bring it to Court, notwithstanding any objection which there may be to its production or to its admissibility: Provided that the validity of any such objection shall be decided on by the Court. (2) The Court, if it sees fit, may inspect the document, unless it refers to matters of State, or take other evidence to enable it to determine on its admissibility. (3) If for such a purpose it is necessary to cause any document to be translated, the Court may, if it thinks fit, direct the translator to keep the contents secret, unless the document is to be given in evidence and, if the interpreter disobeys such direction, he shall be held to have committed an offence under section 198 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023: Provided that no Court shall require any communication between the Ministers and the President of India to be produced before it.

Summary of Section 165 (Production of Documents)

Mandatory Production:
- A witness summoned to produce a document must bring it to court if it is in their possession or power, regardless of any objections to its production or admissibility. The court will decide on the validity of these objections.
Court's Authority:
- The court has the discretion to inspect the document unless it pertains to matters of state. It may also take additional evidence to determine the document's admissibility.
Translation and Confidentiality:
- If translation of a document is required for admissibility, the court may direct the translator to keep the contents confidential unless the document is to be presented as evidence. If the translator violates this directive, they may be subject to penalties under section 198 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Exemption for Government Communications:
- No court shall require the production of communications between the Ministers and the President of India.

This section emphasizes the importance of producing relevant documents in court while balancing confidentiality and the need for admissibility.

Search This Blog

MSc NFSU pune academy QUESTION BANK