KSLU Solved Question Papers
Law of Evidence
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 8
2014 Jun Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 8 Law of Evidence 2014 Jun Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2014 Jun examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2014 Jun examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2014 Jun examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 20 questions answered
Instructions printed on the paper
- N.B. (1) Answer all 5 questions. (2) Figures to the right indicate marks. (3) Answers should be written either in English or Kannada completely.
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1
Unit I
(a)What is Evidence ? Explain the importance of circumstantial evidence.[15]
Answer
For full marks, cover: (1) what evidence is: section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (oral and documentary), and evidence divided by its link to the fact in issue into direct and circumstantial; (2) the importance of circumstantial evidence, in five points: most crimes are committed out of sight, so it is often the only evidence (Trimukh Maroti Kirkan); a conviction may rest on it alone, even for murder (Ram Bharosey); the Act is built to receive it (sections 6 to 16, especially 7, 8, 9 and 14); many independent facts can be stronger together than one witness's word (A.N. Venkatesh); the law gives it special aids (section 106; illustrations to section 114; section 27); (3) its dangers and the safeguards: suspicion is not proof, and the five tests of a complete chain (Sharad Birdhichand Sarda); a table comparing direct and circumstantial evidence; sections 2(1)(e) and 4 to 14 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 in a line; a conclusion.
Part 1: what evidence is
Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 says "Evidence" means and includes "all statements which the Court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses, in relation to matters of fact under inquiry", called oral evidence. It also includes "all documents including electronic records produced for the inspection of the Court", called documentary evidence.
Evidence may also be divided by how it relates to the fact in issue.
- Direct evidence proves the fact in issue itself. A witness who says, "I saw A stab B", gives direct evidence of the stabbing.
- Circumstantial evidence proves other facts from which the fact in issue may be inferred. Suppose A had quarrelled with B, bought a knife the day before, and was seen near B's house that night. If he also ran away the next morning, these are circumstances. Together they may lead to the inference that A stabbed B.
Both are "evidence" in the sense of section 3. Circumstantial evidence is not a lower kind; it works by inference rather than by direct sight.
Part 2: the importance of circumstantial evidence
1. It is often the only evidence
Serious crimes are usually planned to avoid witnesses. Poisoning, murder at night, crimes inside a home, and frauds done on paper rarely have eyewitnesses. Without circumstantial evidence, most of them could never be proved.
Facts. In Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of Maharashtra, (2006) 10 SCC 681, a wife who had been beaten and starved over a dowry demand died at the matrimonial home in 1996. The family said a snake had bitten her. The post-mortem showed she had been strangled, and her body had been propped against a wall.
Held. An offence may be committed in the privacy of a house. Insisting there on the strict standard of proof by circumstances would make it almost impossible to prove. The law does not require evidence that is impossible to lead. The husband's false snakebite story and his failure to explain the injuries were further links in the chain. The conviction for murder was upheld.
2. A conviction may rest on it alone
Facts. In Ram Bharosey v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1954 SC 704, a man was accused of murdering his father and stepmother at night in May 1952. No one saw the killings. The evidence was circumstantial: a blood-stained dhoti, blood-stained ornaments and a gandasa produced from a store room. He had also been seen coming down from the roof early in the morning and bathing, and he had a motive.
Held. The Supreme Court upheld his conviction for murder on this circumstantial evidence. His appeal was dismissed.
3. The Act is built to receive it
Most of the sections on relevancy make circumstances relevant. For example:
- Section 7: facts that are the occasion, cause or effect of a fact in issue. It also covers facts showing the opportunity for it, or the state of things in which it happened.
- Section 8: motive, preparation, and previous or subsequent conduct.
- Section 9: facts that explain or introduce a fact in issue, or establish identity.
- Section 11: facts inconsistent with a fact in issue, such as an alibi.
- Section 14: facts showing a state of mind, such as intention or knowledge.
The Act would make little sense if only direct evidence counted.
4. Many facts together can be stronger than one witness
A single eyewitness may be mistaken, may have seen only part of the event, or may lie. Circumstantial evidence rests on many separate facts, often proved by different witnesses and by objects and records. When they all point the same way, they support one another.
Facts. In A.N. Venkatesh v. State of Karnataka, (2005) 7 SCC 714, a boy was kidnapped and ransom demanded by calls traced to booths at Arasikere. Two men found loitering near the railway track ran away on seeing the police. After arrest, they led the police to a riverbank where the boy's body was dug up.
Held. Their running away was conduct showing a guilty mind, and their pointing out the place was admissible as conduct under section 8. The chain of circumstances was complete, and their conviction was maintained.
5. The law gives it special aids
- Section 106. Some facts are especially within the knowledge of the accused, such as what happened inside his home. Once the prosecution lays the foundation, they may call for an explanation from him (Trimukh Maroti Kirkan).
- Section 114. The court may presume facts from common experience. Illustration (a) allows a presumption against a person found in possession of stolen goods soon after a theft.
- Section 27. Information from an accused in custody may lead to the discovery of a fact. It may then be proved, to the extent it relates distinctly to the discovery.
Part 3: the dangers, and the safeguards
Circumstantial evidence has real dangers. A chain of suspicion may look convincing while pointing to the wrong person. A court may be tempted to fill gaps with guesswork. So the law sets strict tests.
Facts. In Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, (1984) 4 SCC 116, a young wife died of cyanide poisoning four months after her marriage. There was no direct evidence that her husband gave her the poison. The defence said she took her own life.
Held. The Supreme Court laid down five conditions, which it called the panchsheel of proof by circumstantial evidence:
- the circumstances must be fully established, not merely possibly so;
- the facts must be consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt;
- the circumstances must be of a conclusive nature and tendency;
- they must exclude every possible hypothesis except guilt;
- the chain must be so complete that it leaves no reasonable ground for a conclusion consistent with innocence.
The conviction was set aside, as these conditions were not met.
So the importance of circumstantial evidence comes with a duty of care. It may prove guilt fully, but only if every link is proved and the chain allows no other reasonable explanation.
Direct and circumstantial evidence compared
| Point | Direct evidence | Circumstantial evidence |
|---|---|---|
| What it proves | the fact in issue itself | other facts from which the fact in issue is inferred |
| Example | "I saw A stab B" | motive, preparation, presence, flight, recovery |
| Main risk | one witness's mistake or lie | a wrong inference from incomplete facts |
| Test | credibility of the witness | the five conditions (Sharad Birdhichand Sarda) |
| Can it alone convict? | yes | yes, if the chain is complete (Ram Bharosey) |
Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
"Evidence" is now defined in section 2(1)(e) of the Adhiniyam, which adds statements given electronically and digital records. Sections 6 to 16 are now sections 4 to 14. Sections 27, 106 and 114 are the proviso to section 23(2), section 109 and section 119.
Conclusion. Evidence under section 3 of the 1872 Act is the oral and documentary material placed before the court. By its link to the fact in issue it is direct or circumstantial. Circumstantial evidence is of great importance. It is often the only evidence of crimes done in secret (Trimukh Maroti Kirkan), and it can found a conviction alone (Ram Bharosey). The Act's relevancy sections are built to receive it, and many proved facts pointing one way can be stronger than one witness (A.N. Venkatesh). Sections 106, 114 and 27 aid it. Its danger is guesswork, so it must meet the five conditions of a complete chain (Sharad Birdhichand Sarda). Proved in that way, it is as good a basis for a decision as direct evidence.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 8 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.