Monday, 9 April 2012

Law of evidence - basic Principles


The Salutary principle is that evidence is to be weighed and not counted and the quality of the evidence is more important than the quantity assumes significance. Therefore, if the testimony of the police officer is of unimpeachable character and he is honest and truthful that can be accepted without any corroboration by the independent witness.
( 2000 (1) ALT Cri 9, 1999 (2) MPLJ 374 Bench: S Khare Vinod Kumar Shukla vs State Of M.P. on 20/4/1999)

Principles of law of evidences – (2003) 2 SCC 91



Section 165 – Power of court to put any question or order production of any document – Ritesh Tiwary versus State of U.P – AIR 2010 SC 3823 – Para 30


Section 73.  Court need not have taken trouble of comparing signature – if it is not
pleaded by parties.  2001 CTC (3) 408. 


No plea no evidence – No evidence no plea.  2002 (2) CTC 598. = 1990 MLJ (1) 127 = 1992 MLJ (1) 188.
Section 85 - Power of attorney should be notarized for admissible in evidence.  AIR 1950 All 524. 

RES IPSA LOQUITOR – the things speak for itself. Rule of Evidence – to determine the onus of proof in actions relating to negligence – AIR 2000 SC 2511. this principle applies to criminal cases – AIR 2008 SC 2557.

The accused has only to make his defence probable – AIR 1980 SC 1431. 

Case of the Prosecution has to be tested independently of the defence version – Ram Shankar sahane versus State – 2009 All MR (Cri) 2053

By drawing a due inference / presumption, burden of proof shifts.

Section 3 – false defence taken by the accused – will not help the prosecution to discharge the burden of proving the guilt a beyond reasonable doubt – 2010 All MR (Cri) 3848

Findings of civil court will have precedence over findings of criminal courts – V M Shah versus State of Maharashtra – AIR 1996 SC 339.

Affidavits are not included in the definition of Evidences in Section 3 of the Act and can be used as Evidence only if for sufficient reasons court passes an order – O.19 R.1, 2 – Sudha Devi M P Narayanan – AIR 1988 SC 1381 -

Section 18 – Admission – conducts that would amount to an admission

Section 91 – embodies the best evidence rule – exclusion of oral but by documentary evidence
(2011) 11 SCC 275;
(2010) 13 SCC 487
(2011) 8 SCC 613


Proofs with mathematical certainty, a Myth: Venkatachala Iyengar versus Thimmajamma – 1959 (Supp) 1 SCR 426 (473).


“Read in Evidence” –
Saddiq versus State – 1981 CrLJ 379 – Para 8;
Shaikh Farid Hussainsab versus State of Maharashta – 1983 CrLJ 487 – Para 9;
Shabbir Mohommed versus State of Rajasthan – 1996 CrLJ 2015 – Para 11.



No comments:

Post a Comment