Question: What is the function of the Law of Evidence in judicial inquiries? What are the cardinal rules of that Law? Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [What is the function of the Law of Evidence in judicial inquiries? What are the cardinal rules of that Law?] Answer As held in R v.… Read More »

Question: What is the function of the Law of Evidence in judicial inquiries? What are the cardinal rules of that Law? Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [What is the function of the Law of Evidence in judicial inquiries? What are the cardinal rules of that Law?] Answer As held in R v. Gholam [(1875) ILR 1 All 1], the judicial proceeding can be expressed as any procedure over the course of which evidence is or might be taken, or in which any judgment, sentence, or...

Question: What is the function of the Law of Evidence in judicial inquiries? What are the cardinal rules of that Law?

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [What is the function of the Law of Evidence in judicial inquiries? What are the cardinal rules of that Law?]

Answer

As held in R v. Gholam [(1875) ILR 1 All 1], the judicial proceeding can be expressed as any procedure over the course of which evidence is or might be taken, or in which any judgment, sentence, or final order is passed on recorded evidence.

Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act elaborates on what is court and in respect to the section, it further subsumes the allotment of authorities, judges, magistrates, and every individual who holds an exception to arbitrariness to lawfully authorized to take the evidence.

A judicial inquiry is a formal process directed in order to discuss the conduct of a judge. This term is defined under IEA and states that during the Judicial proceeding, the court must act under legal, administrative, and executive responsibilities. The acting auditor or the magistrate is expected to act in the judicial capacity. The act also explains that any trial inquiry must be adjudged as a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused within the parameters of the respective sections.

In the case of Queen-Empress v. Bahram [(1886) 11 Bom 702 FB], it was held by the court that any proceedings before a Magistrate who is not authorized to direct an inquiry will not be considered as a judicial proceeding in any circumstances.

Further in Queen v. Tulja [(1888) ILR 12 Bom 36], it was also held that any inquiry which is taken lawfully can be remembered as a lawful proceeding. Therefore an inquiry is judicial if it has the objective to resolve the jural relation between one party to another.

In a judicial proceeding, the courts have to give a decision about the existence or non-existence of a right or liability and to reach the conclusion court needs materials. Therefore Law of Evidence in a particular way creates bridges that help in the judicial inquiries, it sets up rules and procedures that mould the sight of any trial.

Cardinal rules of Law of evidence

Following are the cardinal rules of Law of evidence in judicial inquiries:

1. Best evidence rule

The best evidence rule has been regarded as a fundamental principle upon which the law of evidence depends, although it is not particularly mentioned anywhere but is the basis of sections 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872. The rule deals with the assumption that the quality of the process of arriving at a decision depends upon the nature and character of evidence that is placed before the Court.

2. Relevancy of facts

Rule of relevancy implies that certain fact is connected or is so important to be proved for adjudicating the controversy or fact in issue. It suggests that judges are required to consider only relevant evidence to decide whether a disputed fact can be recorded as proved or not. (Section 5, Indian Evidence Act) and the evidence must be confined only to the matter/s in the issue.

3. Admissibility of evidence

Rule of admissibility implies that how a certain form of evidence relating to the relevant fact is to be proved. When either party proposes to present evidence before the Court, of any fact, the Judge may enquire from such party about the manner in which the alleged fact, if proved, would be relevant. The Judge can then, admit such evidence only if he thinks that such fact would be relevant, and not otherwise (Section 136, Indian Evidence Act).

4. Appreciation of evidence

The process which facilitates a Judge to arrive at a conclusion is called appreciation of evidence. This is a matter left to the Judge’s wisdom and experience, as it’s very difficult to encapsulate appreciation of evidence in statutory form.


Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

  1. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-I
  2. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-II
  3. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-III
  4. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-IV
  5. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-V
  6. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VI
  7. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VII
  8. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-VIII
  9. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-IX
  10. Law of Evidence Mains Questions Series Part-X
Updated On 2021-09-20T04:42:11+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story