Facts relevant when right or custom is in question — Where the question is as to existence of any right or custom, the following facts are relevant: a any transaction by which the right or custom in question was created, claimed modified, recognized, asserted or denied, or which was inconsistent with its existence; b Particular instances in which the right or custom was claimed, recognized, or exercised, or in which its exercise was disputed, asserted, or departed from. Would you make a list every one of all your public sites like your Facebook page, twitter feed, or linkedin profile? Motive is a thing primarily known to the accused himself and it may not the possible for the prosecution in each and every case to find out the real motive behind the crime; Barikanoo v. 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. The guidance relevant to the issue before us is reflected in the statutory provisions …. Francis had appeared in the court on account of telephonic information. Clause 5: When the original is a public document within the meaning-of Section 74. Natural witness Witnesses being close relations of deceased living opposite to house of deceased, are natural witnesses to be believed; Om Parkash v.
State of Maharashtra, 1997 2 Crimes 47 Bom. Presumption as to electronic agreements — 185A. A prayer for extension of time made by the defendant is not to be granted just as a matter of routine and merely for the asking, more so when the period of 90 days has expired. Comments When attesting witness not necessary In case the document is registered then except in the case of a will it is not necessary to call an attesting witness, unless the execution has been specifically denied by the person by whom it purports to have been executed; Ishwar Dass Jain dead through L. Inference can be drawn regarding proof of document by admission of parties either oral or other evidence; B. The language employed by the draftsman of processual law may be liberal or stringent, but the fact remains that the object of prescribing procedure is to advance the cause of justice. Section 68 speaks of as to how a document required by law to be attested can be proved.
The main points that Naavi makes here are a Section 65B as well as 65A of Indian Evidence Act refer to the special provisions of the Act in respect of Electronic Documents. This has led to confusion and counter-claims. Hearsay in documents The hearsay rule is straightforward in relation to oral evidence but a little less so in relation to documents. Illustrations a The question is, whether a given document is the will of A. State of Orissa , 1997 2 Crimes 108 Ori iii When conviction was based on evidence of eye witness and not on identification parade it cannot be set aside on ground that identification was not reliable; Mullagiri Vajiram v. Object Section 10 has been deliberately enacted in order to make acts and statements of a co-conspirator admissible against the whole body of conspirators, because of the nature of crime; Badri Rai v.
It is silent on the subject of board. Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions — When a person is accused of any offence, the burden of proving the existence of circumstances bringing the case within any of the General Exceptions in the Indian Penal Code, 45 of 1860 , or within any special exception or proviso contained in any other part of the same Code, or in any law defining the offence, is upon him, and the Court shall presume the absence of such circumstances. Evidence may be given of facts which show which of them was meant. The circumstances are such that the crime must have been committed either by A, B, C or D. Rishi Chawla also did not pay any fees to Mr.
State of West Bengal, 1997 2 Crimes 53 Cal. Senior counsels argued that at present under the existing provision, if a statement was given in the form electronic evidence, a certificate was required from a person occupying a responsible position in relation to operation of the relevant device or the management of relevant activities. He makes an entry showing that on a particular occasion he received less than he really did receive. Therefore, when one person makes a misrepresentation to the other about a fact he would not be shut out by the rule of estoppel if that other person knew the true state of facts and must consequently not have been misled by the misrepresentation; Maddanappa v. Production of title-deeds of witness, not a party — No witness who is not a party to a suit shall be compelled to produce his title-deeds to any property, or any document in virtue of which he holds any property as pledgee or mortgagee, or any document the production of which might tend to criminate him, unless he has agreed in writing to produce them with the person seeking the production of such deeds or some person through whom he claims.
This being a fact observed by B in the course of his employment, showing that a fraud has been committed since the commencement of the proceedings, it is not protected from disclosure. It must stand on its own legs. . It had noting to do with carrying the conspiracy into effect; Mirza Akbar v. State of Rajasthan, 1997 2 Crimes 125 Raj. Proof of contents of documents — The contents of documents may be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence. Naavi For a Copy of Section 65B of Indian Evidence Act, s or Browse through in the left menu of About Vijayashankar Na Naavi is a veteran Cyber Law specialist in India and is presently working from Bangalore as an Information Assurance Consultant.
On 1st March, 2007 since the defendant did not appear, as the counsel, Mr. As mentioned earlier, oral evidence cannot prove the contents of documents. Merely on the basis of the knowledge of the pendency of the case, it is not expected from the defendant to comprehend the allegations made against him and the documents which have been filed and to file a written statement within 30 days of such knowledge. Now during investigation, he issued 65B certificate after one year on request of I. State of Rajasthan, 1997 4 Supreme 635.
When oral admission as to contents of documents are relevant — Oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant unless and until the party proposing 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. Illustration a A is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. Admissibility Of Electronic Records- 1 Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media produced by a computer 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 of any contents of the original or any fact stated therein of which direct evidence would be admissible. Francis, Advocate, and he with his senior will be able to look after the matter properly. The fact that, at the time when he left home he had sudden and urgent business at the place to which he went is relevant, as tending to explain the fact that he left home suddenly. Francis did not know whether the defendant has been served with the complete paper book or not. Proof when attesting witness denies the execution — If the attesting witness denies or does not recollect the execution of the document its execution may be proved by other evidence.
Francis, learned Counsel, appeared on behalf of defendant on 18th December, 2006 and sought time to file the written statement. However, faced with the testimony of a single witness, the court may classify the oral testimony of a single witness, the court may classify the oral testimony into three categories, namely i wholly reliable, ii wholly unreliable, and iii neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. The courts are concerned with the merit of the statement of a particular witness. A protest made by the Captain, whose attendance cannot be procured, is a relevant fact. He cheated the department and Country making illegal efforts. He is also mentioned on his face book profile that he is the student from July, 1999. Opinion on relationship, when relevant — When the Court has to form an opinion as to the relationship of one person to another, the opinion, expressed by conduct, as to the existence of such relationship, or any person who, as a member of the family or otherwise, has special means of knowledge on the subject, is a relevant fact: Provided that such opinion shall not be sufficient to prove a marriage in proceedings under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 4 of 1869 or in prosecutions under section 494, 495, 497 or 498 of the Indian Penal Code 45 of 1860.
The applicant contended that on receipt of such a letter from Mr. Reasonable proof of ownership In absence of any reasonable proof that defendant was the actual owner of the property, and plaintiff was only a name given does not prove that respondent was owner and plaint maker was only a name given to the property; Rama Kanta Jain v. Who may give evidence of agreement varying term of document — Person who are not parties to document, or their representatives in interest may give evidence of any fact tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document. It is better if it is corroborated by inbuilt guarantees which ensure the truthfulness of the prosecution case, such as a prompt F. I have original mobile instrument with all messages and had used a downloaded software to print out for the relevant period and the down load is also in the soft ware in my system. Facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or intentional — When there is a question whether an act was accidental or intentional, 1 or done with a particular knowledge or intention, the fact that such act formed part of a series of similar occurrence, in each of which the person doing the act was concerned, is relevant. Therefore, the new counsel immediately prepared the written statement and filed the same along with the present application for condensation of delay dated 15th May, 2007.