B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 8 Law of Evidence 2013 Jun Question Paper with Solutions

For full marks, cover: why the three terms come first: section 5 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 allows evidence only of facts in issue and relevant facts "and of no others", and section 136 lets the judge ask how a fact would be relevant; the three terms as three filters a court applies in turn: (1) "fact" in section 3, its two limbs (physical and psychological facts) and its five illustrations; (2) "facts in issue": the definition read in its parts, the Explanation and issues under Order XIV of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and in a criminal trial the charge, the ingredients and the defences, with the illustration and K.M. Nanavati; (3) "relevant": connection in a way the Act names, legal and not merely logical relevance, the relevancy sections grouped, a relevant recording (R.M. Malkani); relevancy, admissibility and proof told apart (Ram Bihari Yadav); facts that need no proof (sections 56 to 58, Onkar Nath); one murder trial sorted into the three kinds; a table; section 2(1)(f), (g) and (k) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 and the illustration it drops; a conclusion.

1. Physical facts are those the senses can perceive: a knife on a table, a crack in a wall, a sound in the night.
2. Psychological facts are states of mind: an intention, a belief, good faith, a feeling of pain.

The Act gives five illustrations:

1. That certain objects are arranged in a certain order in a certain place is a fact.
2. That a man heard or saw something is a fact.
3. That a man said certain words is a fact.
4. That a man holds a certain opinion or has a certain intention is a fact. So is acting in good faith or fraudulently, or being conscious of a particular sensation.
5. That a man has a certain reputation is a fact.

So words spoken, opinions held and reputation are all facts. The definition is wide on purpose. Almost anything a court may need to know is a "fact"; the later filters decide which facts may be proved.

In a civil suit. The Explanation deals with issues of fact recorded by a court under the civil procedure law. The fact to be asserted or denied in answer to such an issue is a fact in issue. Under Order XIV of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, issues are framed from the pleadings. So in a suit on a promissory note, whether the defendant signed it is a fact in issue.

In a criminal trial. The facts in issue are the ingredients of the offence charged, together with any defence raised. The Act's illustration takes a murder trial. The facts in issue may be that A caused B's death and that A intended it. They may also be that A received grave and sudden provocation from B, or was of unsound mind at the time.

Facts. In K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1962 SC 605, a naval officer shot his wife's lover after she confessed the affair to him. He pleaded accident, and grave and sudden provocation.

Held. The prosecution had to prove every ingredient of murder, and that burden never shifted. Once he relied on an exception, section 105 placed on him the burden of proving it. The test of provocation was a reasonable person of his class placed in his situation. The exception did not apply, and the appeal was dismissed.

2. The ways the Act names. They include the same transaction (section 6), occasion, cause and effect (section 7), and motive, preparation and conduct (section 8). Others are facts that explain or introduce (section 9) and facts inconsistent with a fact in issue (section 11). The Act also names admissions and confessions (sections 17 to 31) and statements of persons who cannot be called (section 32). Judgments (sections 40 to 44), opinions (sections 45 to 51) and character (sections 52 to 55) complete the list.
3. A relevant fact is proved like any other. It needs evidence, just as a fact in issue does.

Facts. In R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra, (1973) 1 SCC 471, the Coroner of Bombay demanded money from a surgeon to clear him at an inquest. With the consent of a doctor who took part in the calls, the police recorded the telephone conversations.

Held. A contemporaneous tape record of a relevant conversation is a relevant fact under section 8 and admissible under section 7. It must be relevant to the matters in issue, the voice must be identified, and its accuracy must be proved. Even evidence obtained illegally is admissible, subject to the judge's discretion. The conviction was upheld.

Held. The list in section 57 is not exhaustive. The court could take judicial notice that the strike was imminent and was launched. But the prosecution also had to prove that the strike was "in connection with any industrial dispute", a fact in issue, and it led no evidence on it. The appellants were acquitted.

One trial, sorted

A is tried for murdering B by stabbing.

Conclusion. A "fact" under section 3 of the 1872 Act is anything the senses can perceive, or any state of mind a person is conscious of. A "fact in issue" is one from which a disputed right, liability or disability necessarily follows. In a civil suit the issues reveal it, and in a criminal trial the ingredients of the offence and the defences do (K.M. Nanavati). A "relevant" fact is one connected with a fact in issue in a way that sections 6 to 55 name (R.M. Malkani). Under section 5 evidence may be given of these two kinds of fact "and of no others". Even then the evidence must be admissible (Ram Bihari Yadav), and some facts need no proof at all (Onkar Nath).