• This document allows one to decode the BARE ACTS for better understanding.


  • This document is for educational purposes only and not for any other purpose except for understanding of the BARE ACTS.
  • Names and examples used are for educational purposes only.
  • There may be spelling mistakes and proofreading has not been done.
  • This document is an extension of rough notes taken in class.
  • The document is not intended to be a comprehensive guide and should not be relied upon as the sole source of information.
  • The document is not a substitute for professional advice or expert analysis and should not be used as such.
  • The document does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation of any particular technology, product, or service.
  • The reader assumes all responsibility for their use of the information contained in this document and any consequences that may arise.
  • The author disclaim any liability for any damages or losses that may result from the use of this document or the information contained therein.
  • The author and publisher reserve the right to update or change the information contained in this document at any time without prior notice.


            • Respective BARE ACTS were used as references in preparing this document.
            • Thanks to the professor for sharing knowledge and references used in this document.

            THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872

            IEA 133. Accomplice. –– 

            An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person; and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.

            E.g evidence is required to make sure the accomplice is telling the truth.

            E.g Accomplice  giving = we got into a red colour car and filled out 2000 rs. If this matches with the evidence from the CCTV then this is called corroborating evidence. 

            E.g if you are punishing the statements of the accomplice, then also it is not illegal. 

            Legal Terms

            Uncorroborated = mean without any other support evidence 

            IEA 134. Number of witnesses. ––

             No particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required for the proof of any fact.

            E.g who is witness = accepting the facts, either by seeing in person or otherwise. 

            IEA 137. Examination-in-chief. –– 

            The examination of witness by the party who calls him shall be called his examination-in-chief.

            Cross-examination. –– The examination of a witness by the adverse party shall be called his Cross-examination.
            Re-examination. ––The examination of a witness, subsequent to the cross-examination by the party who called him, shall be called his re-examination.

            E.g when PP/ advocate calls the witness of his own cases = examination-in-chief.

            E.g now the defence lawyer questions  to the PP witness then = Cross-examination

            E.g Now PP/ advocate gets permission from the magistrate to Re-examination his own witness. 

            Legal Terms

            adverse party = opposite party

            IEA 138. Order of examinations. –– 

            Witnesses shall be first examined-in-chief, then (if the adverse party so desires) cross-examined, then (if the party calling him so desires) re-examined.

            The examination and cross-examination must relate to relevant facts but the cross-examination need not be confined to the facts to which the witness testified on his examination-in-chief.

            Direction of re-examination. –– The re-examination shall be directed to the explanation of matters referred to in cross-examination; and, if new matter is, by permission of the Court, introduced in re-examination, the adverse party may further cross-examine upon that matter.

            Legal terms 

            How many advocates are allowed: you can have any number of advocates.

            IEA 141. Leading questions. –– 

            Any question suggesting the answer which the person putting it wishes or expects to receive is called a leading question.

            E.g normal question : whom you have seen that day?

            E.g leading question : did you see Thulasi on that day tuesday ?

            Where they want to witness to say what they want.

            IEA 142. When they must not be asked. –– 

            Leading questions must not, if objected to by the adverse party be asked in an examination-in-chief, or in a re-examination, except with the permission of the Court.

            E.g leading questions cannot be asked in Examination in chief and re-examination 

            The Court shall permit leading questions as to matters which are introductory or undisputed, or which have, in its opinion, been already sufficiently proved.


            In its opinion = court's opinion

            Undisputed = both the advocates

            Introductory = introduction 

            Legal Terms : Start being self dependent 

            IEA 143. When they may be asked. –– Leading questions may be asked in cross-examination.

            IEA 146. Questions lawful in cross-examination. –– 

            When a witness is cross-examined, he may, in addition to the questions hereinbefore referred to, be asked any questions which tend––

            (1) to test his veracity,

            (2) to discover who he is and what is his position in life, or

            (3) to shake his credit, by injuring his character, although the answer to such questions might tend directly or indirectly to criminate him or might expose or tend directly or indirectly to expose him to a penalty or forfeiture:

            E.g in addition to the questions hereinbefore = in addition to leading questions hereinbefore.

            E.g injuring his character = how to understand if the person is lying 

            E.g defence layer = by giving leading questions made him stuck with the wrong answer. 

            Provided that in a prosecution for an offence under section 376, section 376A, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or for attempt to commit any such offence, where the question of consent is an issue, it shall not be permissible to adduce evidence or to put questions in the cross-examination of the victim as to the general immoral character, or previous sexual experience, of such victim with any person for proving such consent or the quality of consent


            IEA 149. Question not to be asked without reasonable grounds. –– 

            No such question as is referred to in section 148 ought to be asked, unless the person asking it has reasonable grounds for thinking that the imputation which it conveys is well-founded.



            (c) A witness, of whom nothing whatever is known is asked at random whether he is a dakait. There are here no reasonable ground for the question.

            E.g no random question cannot be asked. 

            IEA 150. Procedure of Court in case of question being asked without reasonable grounds. –– 

            If the Court is of opinion that any such question was asked without reasonable grounds, it may, if it was asked by any barrister, pleader, vakil or attorney, report the circumstances of the case to the High Court or other authority to which such barrister, pleader, vakil or attorney is subject in the exercise of his profession.

            General Questions: Legal

            AIB : All India Bar council exam

            Certificate of registration number will be received. 

            80% of the advocates don’t know LAW.  Never rely on the advocates, they always lie to rely on you. 

            Best Lier can only be a Advocates 

            Legal Terms : barrister, pleader, vakil or attorney = advocates 

            IEA 151. Indecent and scandalous questions. –– 

            The Court may forbid any questions or inquiries which it regards as indecent or scandalous, although such questions or inquiries may have some bearing on the questions before the Court unless they relate to facts in issue, or to matters necessary to be known in order to determine whether or not the facts in issue existed.

            IEA 152. Questions intended to insult or annoy. –– 

            The Court shall forbid any question which appears to it to be intended to insult or annoy, or which, though proper in itself, appears to the Court needlessly offensive in form.

            E.g you can injure his character but not insult or annoy. 

            IEA 154. Question by party to his own witness. ––

            (1) The Court may, in its discretion, permit the person who calls a witness to put any questions to him which might be put in cross-examination by the adverse party.

            E.g when the witness turned hostile, then cross examine your own witness to prove that this person is not reliable.

            (2) Nothing in this section shall disentitle the person so permitted under sub-section (1), to rely on any part of the evidence of such witness.

            IEA 155. Impeaching credit of witness. –– 

            The credit of a witness may be impeached in the following ways by the adverse party, or, with the consent of the Court, by the party who calls him: ––

            (1) by the evidence of persons who testify that they, from their knowledge of the witness, believe him to be unworthy of credit;

            (3) by proof of former statements inconsistent with any part of his evidence which is liable to be contradicted;

            E.g when bring the neighbor of the witness and makes the credibility of witness

            E.g bribe is proved 

            IEA 159. Refreshing memory. –– 

            A witness may, while under examination, refresh his memory by

            referring to any writing made by himself at the time of the transaction concerning which he is questioned, or so soon afterwards that the Court considers it likely that the transaction was at that time fresh in his memory.

            E.g to refresh the memory any supporting doc or letter can be given to the witness to remember.

            The witness may also refer to any such writing made by any other person, and read by the witness within the time aforesaid, if when he read it he knew it to be correct.

            When witness may use copy of document to refresh memory. –– Whenever a witness may refresh his memory by reference to any document, he may, with the permission of the Court, refer to a copy of such document:

            Provided the Court be satisfied that there is sufficient reason for the non-production of the original.

            An expert may refresh his memory by reference to professional treatises.

            IEA 3. Interpretation-clause


            “Court” includes all Judges and Magistrates and all persons, (except arbitrators), legally authorized to take evidence.

            “Fact”.–– “Fact” means and includes –– 

            (1) anything, state of things, or relation of things, capable of being perceived by the senses;

             E.g  Anything = capable of the sense (5 senses) 

            E.g according to Indian Evidence Act, fact is anything - 5 senses = seeing, smell, touch, hearing & tasting 

            Legal Terms 

            Best Advocate = A advocate who is calm and listens and use it against others 

            (2) any mental condition of which any person is conscious.


            (b) That a man heard or saw something, is a fact.

            “Relevant”. ––

              One fact is said to be relevant to another when the one is connected with the other in any of the ways referred to in the provisions of this Act relating to the relevancy of facts.

            Legal Term

            E.g a fact is said to be relevant to the Original Fact is called Relevant fact. 

            E.g when “A” sends a message to “X” and then “X” murders “A”. this message is relevant to facts 

            “Facts in issue”.–– The expression “facts in issue” means and includes ––

            any fact from which, either by itself or in connection with other facts, the existence,

            non-existence, nature or extent of any right, liability, or disability, asserted or denied in any suit or proceeding, necessarily follows.

            E.g Facts in issue means = E.g thulasi killed X with Pistol. Fact in issue is has the murder taken place

            E.g Facts in issue , must be decided in the court.

            E.g Main points relevant to the issue for which it is arguing .


            A is accused of the murder of B.

            At his trial the following facts may be in issue: ––

            That A caused B’s death;

            That A intended to cause B’s death;

            That A had received grave and sudden provocation from B;

            That A, at the time of doing the act which caused B’s death, was, by reason of unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing its nature.

            Legal Terms

            E.g facts may be in issue: = means facts in Questions

            “Document”. ––

            “Document” means any matter expressed or described upon any substance by

            means of letters, figures or marks, or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which may be used, for the purpose of recording that matter.


            A writing is a document;

            Words printed lithographed or photographed are documents;

            A map or plan is a document;

            An inscription on a metal plate or stone is a document;

            A caricature is a document.


            5 sep  

            “Evidence”. ––“Evidence” means and includes ––

            (1) all statements which the Court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses, in relation to matters of fact under inquiry

            such statements are called oral evidence;

            (2) all documents including electronic records produced for the inspection of the Court;]

            such documents are called documentary evidence.

            “Proved”. –– 

            A fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters before it, the Court; either believes it to exist, or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists.

            “Disproved”. –– 

            A fact is said to be disproved when, after considering the matters before it, the

            Court either believes that it does not exist, or considers its non-existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it does not exist.

            “Not proved”. –– 

            A fact is said not to be proved when it is neither proved nor disproved.

            IEA 4. “May presume”. –– 

            Whenever it is provided by this Act that the Court may presume a fact, it may either regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved, or may call for proof of it.

            “Shall presume”. ––  e.g will believe 

            Whenever it is directed by this Act that the Court shall presume a fact, it shall regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved.

            “Conclusive proof”. –– 

            When one fact is declared by this Act to be conclusive proof of another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it.

            E.g when one among the facts is proved then all the facts are assumed to be conclusive proof. 

            E.g when couple  are staying in lodge, when police


            IEA 5. Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts. –– 

            Evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence of non-existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others.

            Legal term :

            Civil Suit : civil case

            Criminal case : Criminal 

            Explanation. –– This section shall not enable any person to give evidence of a fact which he is disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force relating to Civil Procedure

            IEA 6. Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction. –– 

            Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places.

            E.g filled petrol 5 liters in can before murder - relavent fact



            (a) A is accused of the murder of B by beating him. Whatever was said or done by A or B or the by-standers at the beating, or so shortly before or after it as to form part of the transaction, is a relevant fact.

            Legal Terms: 

            Discharge : is done only by the Judge only when there is no ground

            Acquittal : when judges are unable to prove the crime with evidence. 

            IEA 7. Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue. –– 

            Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect, immediate or otherwise, of relevant facts, or facts in issue, or which constitute the state of things under which they happened, or which afforded an opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant.


            (b) The question is, whether A murdered B. 

            Marks on the ground, produced by a struggle at or near the place where the murder was committed, are relevant facts.

            E.g when there is power cut and during that time murder has taken place. 

            E.g Power cut is occasion to relevant fact 

            IEA 8. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct. –– 

            Any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact.

            E.g A murder the X in the tea shop when there is power cut 

            E.g change in regular behaviour after committing a crime.

            E.g the father has observed, after reaching home, saw him shivering and behaving abnormally and didn't get to eat with the family. 

             Legal Terms:  subsequent conduct means, behaviour after committing crime.

            IEA 9. Facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts. –– 

            Facts necessary to explain or introduce a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which support or rebut an inference suggested by a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which establish the identity of any thing or person whose identity is relevant, or fix the time or place at which any fact in issue or relevant fact happened, or which show the relation of parties by whom any such fact was transacted, are relevant in so far as they are necessary for that purpose.

            E.g i have already booked the flight 3 days - introduced the new fact 

            E.g rebut an inference suggested by a fact in the issue : got an idea that he left the home by 9 pm. 

            E.g went to Tea shop and acted to talk in the phone - tea shop owner identifies the A 

            E.g person whose identity is relevant : identity or identification parade is conducted under this section.

            Why this parade is happening because no innocent person must be punished. 

            Legal Terms : Rebut = means dismiss 


            (a) The question is, whether a given document is the will of A.

            The state of A’s property and of his family at the date of the alleged will may be relevant facts.

            E.g at the date mentioned on the will : what was the situation of the family- was there any fight, any property was sold or purchased. 

            (c) A is accused of a crime.

            The fact that, soon after the commission of the crime, A absconded from his house, is relevant, under section 8,as conduct subsequent to and affected by facts in issue.

            The fact that, at the time when he left home, he had sudden and urgent business at the place to which he went, is relevant, as tending to explain the fact that he left home suddenly.

            The details of the business on which he left are not relevant, except in so far as they are necessary to show that the business was sudden and urgent.

            IEA 11. When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant.–– 

            Facts not otherwise relevant are relevant ––

            (1) if they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact;

            (2) if by themselves or in connection with other facts they make the existence or non-existence of any fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or improbable.

            Legal Term 

            Alabi : a claim or piece of evidence that one was elsewhere when an act,


            (a) The question is, whether A committed a crime at Calcutta on a certain day.

            The fact that, on that day, A was at Lahore is relevant.

            The fact that, near the time when the crime was committed, A was at a distance from the place where it was committed, which would render it highly improbable, though not impossible, that he committed it, is relevant.


            IEA 17. Admission defined.––

            An admission is a statement, oral or documentary or contained in electronic form, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned.

            E.g Admission is done by the witness person. 

            IEA 18. Admission––by party to proceeding or his agent. –– 

            Statements made by a party to the proceeding, or by an agent to any such party, whom the Court regards, under the circumstances of the case, as expressly or impliedly authorized by him to make them, are admissions.

            By suitor in representative character. –– 

            Statements made by parties to suits suing or sued in a representative character, are not admissions, unless they were made while the party making them held that character.

            Legal Terms : suitor = means the one who initiated civil suit against anyone. 

            IEA 24. Confession caused by inducement, threat or promise, when irrelevant in criminal proceeding.–– 

            A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding, if the making of the confession appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to him reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him.

            E.g when confession becomes irrelevant when made under threat or deal or promise. Court will not consider it.

            IEA 25. Confession to police-officer not to be proved. –– 

            No confession made to a police-officer3, shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence.

            E.g any statement of confession made to police is not accepted.

            IEA 26. Confession by accused while in custody of police not to be proved against him. –– 

            No confession made by any person whilst he is in the custody of a police-officer, unless it be made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, shall be proved as against such person.

             E.g confession made during police custody is not accepted. 

            IEA 28. Confession made after removal of impression caused by inducement, threat or promise, relevant. ––

            If such a confession as is referred to in section 24 is made after the impression caused by any such inducement, threat or promise has, in the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant.

            IEA 31. Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop. –– 

            Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted but they may operate as estoppels under the provisions hereinafter contained.

            Legal Term : Estoppels : if you have said/ admitted before the court, you cannot deny it. 


            IEA 32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant. –– 

            Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which under the circumstances of the case appears to the Court unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases: ––

            E.g whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense  = went to the USA, and asked that person to come as evidence. He is asking for 3 months time. Court cannot wait for these people.

            (1) When it relates to cause of death. –– [DD] Dying Declaration 

            When the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his death, or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that person’s death comes into question.

            Such statements are relevant whether the person who made them was or was not, at the time when they were made, under expectation of death, and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question.

            Legal Terms : [DD] Dying Declaration 

            (2) or is made in course of business. –– 

            When the statement was made by such person in the ordinary course of business, and in particular when it consists of any entry or memorandum made by him in books kept in the ordinary course of business, or in the discharge of professional duty; or of an acknowledgement written or signed by him of the receipt of money, goods, securities or property of any kind; or of a document used in commerce written or signed by him; or of the date of a letter or other document usually dated, written or signed by him.

            E.g police diary - where daily activities are made noted 

            (3) or against interest of maker.–– 

            When the statement is against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the person making it, or when, if true, it would expose him or would have exposed him to a criminal prosecution or to a suit for damages.

            Legal Terms :  pecuniary or proprietary interest = means money interest. 

            (4) or gives opinion as to public right or custom, or matters of general interest. –– 

            When the statement gives the opinion of any such person, as to the existence of any public right or custom or matter of public or general interest, of the existence of which, if it existed, he would have been likely to be aware, and when such statement was made before any controversy as to such right, custom or matter had arisen.

            E.g when he made an opinion and controversy broke out, now this opinion has become a relevant fact.

            (5) or relates to existence of relationship.–– 

            When the statement relates to the existence of any relationship by blood, marriage or adoption between persons as to whose relationship by blood, marriage or adoption the person making the statement had special means of knowledge, and when the statement was made before the question in dispute was raised.

            E.g when A informs B is a close friend while I was in Delhi and married her. No one knows this information in his family. Now A dies . 

            While in a property dispute, the wife of A files cases. The B friend of A gives a statement that will become relevant. 

            (6) or is made in will or deed relating to family affairs.––

             When the statement relates to the existence of any relationship by blood, marriage or adoption between persons deceased, and is made in any will or deed relating to the affairs of the family to which any such deceased person belonged, or in any family pedigree, or upon any tombstone, family portrait or other thing on which such statements are usually made, and when such statement was made before the question in dispute was raised.

            E.g  Raj reveals the secret to Kamal and that he will be giving 20% property to the red cross. The recordings provided before the court will be considered relevant facts. 

            (7) or in document relating to transaction mentioned in section 13, clause (a). –– 

            When the statement is contained in any deed, will or other document which relates to any such transaction as is mentioned in section 13, clause (a).

            (8) or is made by several persons and expresses feelings relevant to matter in question. –– 

            When the statement was made by a number of persons, and expressed feelings or impressions on their part relevant to the matter in question.

            E.g Public sentiments in large can be given relevant information. 


            7 sep  

            Daily One Legal Word : 

            Ex parte 

            – Proceedings in the absence of the other party

            This term means "by or for one party." The term refers to an attorney's communication with A judge or Arbitrator without notice to, and outside the presence of, the other parties.

            Daily One Advocacy Rule : 

            An Advocate must Never get attached or involved either Emotionally or Personally in any of his CASES.



            IEA 45. Opinions of experts. –– 

            When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science, or art, or as to identity of handwriting, or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts. 

            Such persons are called experts. 


            (a) The question is, whether the death of A was caused by poison. The opinions of experts as to the symptoms produced by the poison by which A is supposed to have died, are relevant.


            IEA 52. In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed, irrelevant. –– 

            In civil cases, the fact that the character of any person concerned is such as to render probable or improbable any conduct imputed to him, is irrelevant, except in so far as such character appears from facts otherwise relevant.

            Legal Terms : Conduct = Behaviour 

            E.g In Civil cases = the conduct is important in civil cases. Here they are trying to judge the conduct. His character is not relevant. 

            IEA 53. In criminal cases previous good character relevant. –– 

            In criminal proceedings, the fact that the person accused is of a good character, is relevant.

            E.g Criminal cases : personal character is important - he is a good person. 

            IEA 54. Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply. –– 

            In criminal proceedings, the fact that the accused person has a bad character, is irrelevant, unless evidence has been given that he has a good character, in which case it becomes relevant.

            E.g - previous bad character isn't considered. 

            E.g except in reply - defense lawyer - states that his friends are  stating that he is a good character, but the PP says that these are cooked-up stories. Now PP says that already there is a previous bad character & proved. Then Court will accept the bad character will be accepted 

            Explanation 1. ––This section does not apply to cases in which the bad character of any person is itself a fact in issue.

            Explanation 2. ––A previous conviction is relevant as evidence of bad character.


            IEA 59. Proof of facts by oral evidence. –– 

            All facts, except the contents of documents or electronic records, may be proved by oral evidence.

            IEA 60. Oral evidence must be direct. –– 

            Oral evidence must, in all cases, whatever, be direct; that is to say ––

            if it refers to a fact which could be seen, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he saw it;

            if it refers to a fact which could be heard, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he heard it;

            if it refers to a fact which could be perceived by any other sense or in any other manner, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he perceived it by that sense or in that manner;

            if it refers to an opinion or to the grounds on which that opinion is held, it must be the evidence of the person who holds that opinion on those grounds:

            Provided that the opinions of experts expressed in any treatise commonly offered for sale, and the grounds on which such opinions are held, may be proved by the production of such treatises if the author is dead or cannot be found; or has become incapable of giving evidence, or cannot be called as a witness without an amount of delay or expense which the Court regards as unreasonable:

            Provided also that, if oral evidence refers to the existence or condition of any material thing other than a document, the Court may, if it thinks fit, require the production of such material thing for its inspection.

            E.g Oral evidence - there is no concept of 

            Legal Terms:

            E.g Direct evidence = Oral devidence:  i saw the murder

            E.g Hearsay evidence : my father said that he saw the murder

            E.g Circumstances Evidence : the grass was distrubed and has foot marks. 

            CBI and CID are expert in detecting Crime


            IEA 61. Proof of contents of documents. –– 

            The contents of documents may be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence.

            IEA 62. Primary evidence. –– 

            Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court.

            IEA 63. Secondary evidence. –– 

            Secondary evidence means and includes ––

            (1) certified copies given under the provisions hereinafter contained;

            (2) copies made from the original by mechanical processes which in themselves insure the accuracy of the copy, and copies compared with such copies;

            (3) copies made from or compared with the original;

            (4) counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not execute them;

            (5) oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself seen it.

            IEA 64. Proof of documents by primary evidence. –– 

            Documents must be proved by primary evidence except in the cases hereinafter mentioned.

            IEA 65. Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given.–– 

            Secondary evidence may be given of the existence, condition or contents of a document in the following cases: ––

            (a) when the original is shown or appears to be in the possession or power –– 

            of the person against whom the document is sought to be proved,

            E.g When the original document of the property is there. 

            (b) when the existence, condition or contents of the original have been proved to be admitted inwriting by the person against whom it is proved or by his representative in interest;

            E.g now the opposite person can show the xerox copy of the sales deed, when the original is not available.

            (d) when the original is of such a nature as not to be easily movable;

            E.g Dead body is cremated, then the photos of the dead body is Primary evidence.

            E.g when the primary evidence cannot be brought to the court then only secondary evidence is acceptable.  


            IEA 74. Public documents. –– 

            The following documents are public documents: ––

            (1) documents forming the acts or records of the acts ––

            (i) of the sovereign authority,

            (ii) of official bodies and tribunals, and

            (iii) of public officers, legislative, judicial and executive, of any part of India or of the Commonwealth, or of a foreign country;

            (2) public records kept in any State of private documents.

            IEA 75. Private documents. –– All other documents are private.

            E.g What are the Properties sachin owns will you get in RTI: no this is private document

            E.g What income tax does Sachi payes will you get in RTI: no this is private document

            PART III



            IEA 101. Burden of proof. –– 

            Whoever desires any Court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts exist. 

            When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said that the burden of proof lies on that person.

            E.g Whoever wants the judge to give in his favour, he has to prove it. 

            (a) A desires a Court to give judgment that B shall be punished for a crime which A says B has committed.

            A must prove that B has committed the crime.

            IEA 102. On whom burden of proof lies. –– 

            The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side. 


            (a) A sues B for land of which B is in possession, and which, as A asserts, was left to A by the will of C, B’s father.

            If no evidence were given on either side, B would be entitled to retain his possession. Therefore the burden of proof is on A.

            IEA 105. Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions. ––


            (a) A, accused of murder, alleges that, by reason of unsoundness of mind, he did not know the nature of the act. The burden of proof is on A.

            IEA 112. Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy. –– 

            The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when he could have been begotten.

            E.g when the wife is divorced within the 258 days given birth then this son is said to be the legitimate of the divorced father. 

            IEA 113A. Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman. ––

            When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty, the court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative of her husband.

            Explanation. –– For the purposes of this section, “cruelty” shall have the same meaning as in

            section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).]

            E.g Here evidence of cruelty must be there when she committed within seven years of marriage. 

            After 3 years of marriage she committed sucide. No body marks on Body. now when the parents say that there was abetment by the husband to commit sucide.

            IEA 113B. Presumption as to dowry death. ––-

            When the question is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown that soon before her death such woman had been subjected by such person to cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.

            Explanation. –– For the purposes of this section, “dowry death” shall have the same meaning as in section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).]

            E.g before her death it must be proven that dowry harassment was done in a reasonable time. 


            IEA 115. Estoppel. ––

             When one person has, by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief, neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding between himself and such person or his representative, to deny the truth of that thing. 


            A intentionally and falsely leads B to believe that certain land belongs to A, and thereby induces B to buy and pay for it.

            The land afterwards becomes the property of A, and A seeks to set aside the sale on the ground that, at the time of the sale, he had no title. He must not be allowed to prove his want of title.


            IEA 118. Who may testify. –– 

            All persons shall be competent to testify unless the Court considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions put to them, or from giving rational answers to those questions, by tender years, extreme old age, disease, whether of body or mind, or any other cause of the same kind. 

            Explanation. –– A lunatic is not incompetent to testify, unless he is prevented by his lunacy from understanding the questions put to him and giving rational answers to them.

            E.g here a 5 year old kid who can understand the question from the magistrate and magistrate believes him, then his evidence can be testified.

            IEA 119. Witness unable to communicate verbally. –– 

            A witness who is unable to speak may give his evidence in any other manner in which he can make it intelligible, as by writing or by signs; but such writing must be written and the signs made in open Court, evidence so given shall be deemed to be oral evidence:

            IEA 122. Communications during marriage. –– 

            No person who is or has been married shall be compelled to disclose any communication made to him during marriage by any person to whom he is or has been married; nor shall he be permitted to disclose any such communication, unless the person who made it, or his representative in interest, consents, except in suits between married persons, or proceedings in which one married person is prosecuted for any crime committed against the other.

            E.g cannot force a wife to confess what your husband has told you about the crime he has done. 
            E.g  when the cases between them [husband & wife ], wife can say all the secrecy. 

            IEA 124. Official communications. –– 

            No public officer shall be compelled to disclose communications made to him in official confidence, when he considers that the public interests would suffer by the disclosure.

            Dying Declaration: is also taken by a Magistrate and has to tell the magistrate from this court. Assess the mental ability of the person by answering the questions posed by him. If the person is making some signs & gestures that have to be recorded also. Medical certificate has to be obtained. 


            8 sep  

            Daily One Legal Word : 

            Ex post facto law

            An ex post facto law is a law that retroactively changes the legal consequences (or status) of actions that were committed, or relationships that existed, before the enactment of the law. In criminal law, it may criminalize actions that were legal when committed; it may aggravate a crime by bringing it into a more severe category than it was in when it was committed; it may change the punishment prescribed for a crime, as by adding new penalties or extending sentences; or it may alter the rules of evidence in order to make conviction for a crime likelier than it would have been when the deed was committed.

            Conversely, a form of ex post facto law commonly called an amnesty law may decriminalize certain acts. (Alternatively, rather than redefining the relevant acts as non-criminal, it may simply prohibit prosecution; or it may enact that there is to be no punishment, but leave the underlying conviction technically unaltered.) A pardon has a similar effect, in a specific case instead of a class of cases (though a pardon more often leaves the conviction itself – the finding of guilt – unaltered, and occasionally pardons are refused for this reason).

            Other legal changes may alleviate possible punishments (for example by replacing the death sentence with lifelong imprisonment) retroactively. Such legal changes are also known by the Latin term in mitius.

            Some common-law jurisdictions do not permit retroactive criminal legislation, though new precedent generally applies to events that occurred before the judicial decision. Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 (with respect to federal laws) and Article 1, Section 10 (with respect to state laws). In some nations that follow the Westminster system of government, such as the United Kingdom, ex post facto laws are technically possible, because the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy allows Parliament to pass any law it wishes. In a nation with an entrenched bill of rights or a written constitution, ex post facto legislation may be prohibited.

            Daily One Advocacy Rule : 

            Don't favour the gender discrimination (Female supporting Female, Male supporting Male) in any case as an Advocate. Surely it will harm your law career.









































            Key word search:

            THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 [IPC],
            THE HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 [HMA],
            THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872 [IEA],
            THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 [CPC],
            THE INDIAN EASEMENT ACT, 1882 [IEA],
            THE LIMITATION ACT, 1963 [LIA],

            #IPC #CRPC #DVA #HMA
            Criminal Major Acts
            a Handbook of notes
            Law of India  
            Indian law books 

            Indian law bare acts

            For complete link look into Criminal Major Acts Notes


            Popular Posts

            HOME LAB : HANDS-ON

            Marriage Registration Online steps [Tamil Nadu]

            Privacy Settings for windows