Legal Bites brings to you Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-I. The questions enlisted here are arranged section-wise and will aid the students preparing for Judiciary, APO or University Exams. The list of questions curated by Legal Bites will help candidates identify the important and frequently asked questions and give them a good practise for their aptitude and knowledge.
Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-I
We know answer writing is a continuous exercise that is an inalienable part of the preparation process for any Examination. A well-written answer not only reflects the knowledge of an aspirant but also his/her ability to tailor the content in a manner suited to meet the expectations of the question.
Rigorous preparation for this exam is mandatory in order to crack it. In the last few months prior to the exams, it is sufficient for candidates to simply keep practising these questions in order to gain mastery over the subjects studied. Not only the candidate’s confidence level but also their scores will show good improvement upon following it.
Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-I of X
The law of Evidence is “Lex Pori” which governs the Court. Comment on this statement.
What do you understand by `Substantive’ and ‘Adjective’ Law? In which category do you place the law of evidence? Explain. [HR.J.S. 2001]
“The rules of evidence are in general the same in civil and criminal proceedings.” Comment and state if there are any exceptions to this rule. [U.P.H.J.S. 2012, DJS 1996, HR.J.S. 2010]
“The Indian Evidence Act is not a complete code in itself.” Comment
What is the relevance of the DNA tests in India? After the Sheema Bora’s murder case analyze the relevancy of DNA evidence as corroborative evidence and circumstantial evidence. UPC.I. 2016
Discuss the term ‘Evidence’. Explain the different kinds of evidence recognized under the Indian Evidence Act. [Bihar. J. 2000, C.G.2003]
Is a First Information Report, an `evidence’ (a substantive piece of evidence)? [Bihar C.J. 1987, U.PH.J.S, 1988]
Is F.I.R. an ‘evidence’ against the informant, if he (informant) is (himself) made an accused subsequently? Give reasons and also refer to the decision of the Supreme Court, if any, on the point.
State three circumstances in which the statement of a dead person would be relevant and admissible in evidence? [UPHJS 1988]
Can evidence obtained by committing the offense of theft is admitted in a case of criminal nature? Give reasons. [UPHJS 2000, BIHAR J 1975, 2011, UPCJ 1996 R.J.S. 1999]
What do you mean by the term `Circumstantial Evidence’? Do you agree with the view that “when there is no direct evidence of any crime, a conviction can be based on the circumstantial evidence alone, and provided the court weighs all circumstances relating to a particular crime as in integrated whole and that any missing link could be fatal to the prosecution case”? Please highlight some of the prominent observations made by the Supreme Court of India on the subject of circumstantial evidence in some of the leading pronouncements. [HR.J.S. 2007]
‘A’ an accused is prosecuted under Section 302, I.P.C. There is no direct evidence of the offense but there is circumstantial evidence against A. Can A be convicted only on the ground of circumstantial evidence? If so, when?
In a case, the accused A is charged under Section 302, 1.1).C. for the murder of B. There is no direct evidence regarding the occurrence of murder but there is evidence to show that the accused A and deceased B were seen together just before the murder of B. Should A be convicted on the basis of this circumstantial evidence? Give reasons and also refer to case law, if any, on the point. [WBJS.1973]
Accused N is charged and prosecuted under Section 302 I.P.C. for the murder of a child aged about 7 years. There was no eyewitness of the murder but the following circumstantial evidence were proved against the accused N:
- The deceased was seen going towards the place of occurrence with the accused, one hour before the sunset (before the occurrence) on the day of the occurrence.
- The accused was seen alone while she was returning back from the place of occurrence.
- There was a blood spot on the cloth of the accused while she was seen returning from the place of occurrence.
- The ear-rings, which the deceased was wearing, were recovered from the accused.
- The broken bangles of the accused were found on the place of occurrence, near the body of the deceased.
- Can N be convicted for the murder of a child on the basis of evidence in the nature of the circumstances mentioned above? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point. [W.B.J.S.1975]
‘A’ an accused was prosecuted and charged for the murder of B. There was no eye-witness (direct evidence) against A. However, there was the following circumstantial evidence against A.
- The deceased was ‘last seen’ with the accused.
- The accused was giving a contradictory statement regarding the presence of the deceased, just before his murder, with the former.
- The dead body of the deceased was recovered at the instance of the accused.
Are the aforesaid facts in the nature of circumstantial evidence sufficient to convict the accused A? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point.
X is prosecuted for the murder of Y under Section 302 I.P.C. During the trial, the prosecution produces some ‘electronic records’ for the inspection of the court. Are the ‘electronic records’ produced for the inspection of court documentary evidence within the meaning of Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act? Give reasons.
Is the ‘tape record of speech’ a document?
‘A’ an accused is prosecuted for the murder of B. The evidence adduced before the trial court shows that there are 75% chances of committing the murder of B by A but 25% chances of not committing the murder of B by A. Presuming yourself to be a Sessions Judge (trial court), what would be your Judgement? Whether the judgment will result in conviction or acquittal of the accused A? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point.
A is prosecuted for the murder of B under Section 302 I.P.C. The prosecution proves the case beyond all reasonable doubts but it cannot prove the case conclusively. Is the accused entitled to the benefit of the doubt and liable to be acquitted? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point.
Define and explain the following: [U.P.C.J. 1999, 2012, Bihar. J. 1977, 1979, 1980, 1984, 1986, 1987, 2011, 2014, M.P.C.J. 2001, 2010, Jharkhand J, 2011, U.P.H.J.S. 1984]
- Proved, not proved and disproved,
- Shall presume,
- Conclusive proof.
“Relevancy & Admissibility are neither synonymous nor is the one included in other” Elucidate this statement. [U.P.J.S.2000, UPILIS 2007, 1992, 2014]
What is the function of the Law of Evidence in judicial inquiries” What are the cardinal rules of that Law?