KSLU Solved Question Papers
Law of Evidence
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 8
2018 Jun Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 8 Law of Evidence 2018 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 2018 Jun examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2018 Jun examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2018 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 · 13 questions answered
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.
Q1Discuss the relevance of facts showing preparation, motive and conduct.[16]
Answer
For full marks, cover: why section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 admits facts that only point towards the fact in issue; section 8 read along a timeline: before the act (motive and preparation, first paragraph) and around and after it (conduct, second paragraph); for each, its meaning, the Act's illustrations, a leading case and its weight: motive (illustrations (a) and (b); Ram Bharosey), preparation (illustrations (c) and (d); K.M. Nanavati), conduct (whose conduct, the test "influences or is influenced by", illustrations (e), (h) and (i); A.N. Venkatesh, Earabhadrappa); statements and conduct (Explanations 1 and 2, illustrations (f), (g), (j) and (k)); conduct before the police (Prakash Chand); a table; the limits; section 6 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 in a line; a conclusion.
Why section 8 matters
Crimes and civil wrongs are seldom seen by witnesses. A court must often reason from what came before and after the act. It asks why a person might do it, what he did to get ready, and how he behaved afterwards. Section 8 makes these facts relevant. Its first paragraph covers motive and preparation. Its second paragraph covers conduct, "whether it was previous or subsequent" to the fact in issue.
Before the act (1): motive
"Any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact."
Meaning. Motive is the reason that moves a person to act: greed, revenge, jealousy, fear.
The Act's examples.
- Illustration (a) is a murder trial. The accused had earlier murdered another man, and the deceased knew it and was extorting money by threatening to reveal it. These facts are relevant, because they give the accused a reason to silence him.
- Illustration (b), a civil case: A sues B on a bond, and B denies making it. That B needed money for a particular purpose at the time is relevant. It gives B a reason to borrow.
Weight.
Facts. In Ram Bharosey v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1954 SC 704, a man was tried at Unnao for murdering his father and stepmother on the night of 26 May 1952. No one saw the killing. The case rested on circumstances, including blood-stained articles, his conduct that morning, and motive.
Held. The appeal was dismissed and the conviction confirmed on the circumstances proved. Motive was one link among several.
Motive alone cannot prove guilt, because many people may have a motive. It matters most where the evidence is circumstantial. Where reliable eyewitnesses prove the act, the absence of motive matters little.
Before the act (2): preparation
Meaning. Preparation is getting ready to commit the act: obtaining weapons or poison, going to the place, arranging means of escape.
The Act's examples.
- Illustration (c): A is tried for murdering B by poison. That before B's death A procured poison similar to the one given to B is relevant.
- Illustration (d), a civil case: on whether a document is A's will, that A made inquiries, consulted lawyers and had drafts prepared is relevant. Those are preparations for making a will.
Facts. In K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1962 SC 605, a naval officer learnt from his wife of her affair. He took a revolver and cartridges from his ship on a false pretext, went to the man's flat and shot him.
Held. The plea of grave and sudden provocation failed, because the fatal blow must be traced to passion that had not cooled. The conviction for murder was upheld. Collecting the weapon beforehand was evidence of preparation of the kind section 8 admits.
Around and after the act: conduct
The second paragraph makes relevant "the conduct of any party, or of any agent to any party, to any suit or proceeding". It also covers "the conduct of any person an offence against whom is the subject of any proceeding". The conduct must relate to the proceeding or a fact in issue. It is relevant "if such conduct influences or is influenced by any fact in issue or relevant fact, and whether it was previous or subsequent thereto".
Whose conduct. The parties, their agents, and in a criminal case the victim.
The test. The conduct must influence, or be influenced by, a fact in issue. Running away because of guilt is influenced by the crime. Running away to attend a family funeral is not.
The Act's examples.
- Illustration (e): an accused who fabricates evidence in his favour, destroys or hides evidence, keeps witnesses away or suborns false witnesses.
- Illustration (h): an accused who absconds after receiving a letter warning him that inquiry is being made for the criminal.
- Illustration (i): an accused who absconds after the crime, or is found with property acquired by it, or tries to hide things used in it.
Facts. In A.N. Venkatesh v. State of Karnataka, (2005) 7 SCC 714, a boy was kidnapped for ransom from Hosadurga. Police searching along a railway line found the two accused far from home; on seeing the police they ran away and were caught. They later led the police to the boy's body, buried in sand on a river bank.
Held. Running away on seeing the police was conduct showing a guilty mind. Pointing out where the body was buried was admissible as conduct under section 8, whether or not the accompanying statements fell within section 27. The convictions stood.
Facts. In Earabhadrappa v. State of Karnataka, (1983) 2 SCC 330, a servant vanished the morning after his mistress was strangled and robbed in 1979. When arrested a year later, he at once led the police to the stolen ornaments.
Held. His absconding, his possession of the stolen property and his false denial were incriminating circumstances. With the presumption in illustration (a) to section 114, they supported his conviction. The death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment.
Statements and conduct
Explanation 1. "Conduct" does not include statements, "unless those statements accompany and explain acts other than statements". A person who runs and shouts "they will kill me" is acting, and his words explain the act.
Explanation 2. "When the conduct of any person is relevant, any statement made to him or in his presence and hearing, which affects such conduct, is relevant."
- Illustration (f): after B was robbed, C said in A's presence that the police were coming for the robber, and A at once ran away. Both C's words and A's flight are relevant.
- Illustration (g): on whether A owes B money, D tells C in A's presence that A owes B. A walks away without answering. The words and his silence are relevant.
Complaints by victims. Illustrations (j) and (k) make relevant a complaint made soon after a rape or a robbery, with its circumstances and terms. A mere statement that she had been raped, without making a complaint, is not relevant as conduct. It may still be relevant as a dying declaration under section 32(1), or as corroboration under section 157.
Conduct before the police
Facts. In Prakash Chand v. State (Delhi Administration), AIR 1979 SC 400, an overseer of the Delhi Development Authority was caught in a bribery trap. When challenged, he stood stunned and silent, with his foot on the file that held the marked notes.
Held. The conduct of an accused when confronted by a police officer is admissible under section 8. Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 bars statements to the police during investigation, not conduct. The conviction stood.
The three heads at a glance
| Head | When | Illustrations | Case | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| motive | before the act | (a), (b) | Ram Bharosey | a link, especially in circumstantial cases |
| preparation | before the act | (c), (d) | K.M. Nanavati | shows the act was planned |
| conduct | before, at and after the act | (e), (h), (i) | A.N. Venkatesh; Earabhadrappa | may show a guilty mind; never alone |
| statements as conduct | with the act | (f), (g), (j), (k) | Prakash Chand (conduct, not statement) | depends on the circumstances |
The limits
- Relevant is not proved. Each fact must itself be proved, and each is only a link.
- Innocent explanations. Flight may come from fear, and buying poison may be for farming. Section 9 lets the accused prove such explanations.
- Statements to the police remain barred. Section 8 admits conduct, not confessions to the police, which sections 25 and 26 exclude.
Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 8 is now section 6 of the Adhiniyam. Motive and preparation are in section 6(1) and conduct in section 6(2), with the same Explanations and illustrations.
Conclusion. Section 8 of the 1872 Act makes relevant the facts that surround an act in time. Before it come motive, the reason for acting (Ram Bharosey), and preparation, the steps taken to get ready (K.M. Nanavati). Around and after it comes conduct, previous or subsequent, influenced by the fact in issue. Examples are flight and the hiding or destruction of evidence (A.N. Venkatesh, Earabhadrappa). Statements count as conduct only when they accompany and explain acts, or affect the conduct of the person who hears them. Conduct before the police is admissible though statements to them are not (Prakash Chand). Each such fact is a link in a chain, never proof by itself.
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.