Lawwatch

Burden of Providing Evidence in a Court

Introduction

Which of the contesting parties should provide evidence in a judicial proceeding is determined on the basis of some judicial principles that are laid down in the Indian Evidence Act.

This write up is exclusively about such principles included in Part III of Indian Evidence Act.

Restraining the Arrest of the Accused in 498A Cases

Enough laws exist in India to protect women from domestic, matrimonial and sexual violence. They, according to women activists, are good only in paper. On one hand the women continue to suffer under violence with no much hope for the victims to have easy access to justice despite having those laws on our statute book. On the other, some of these provisions are largely being misused by educated and powerful sections of disgruntled women as a sharp weapon, rather than a shield, to harass their innocent husbands and their relatives. Even bed-ridden relatives and those living abroad were put under arrest and detention in a quite number of cases. The Section 498A of Indian Penal Code (IPC) is one such provision, now under limelight for unleashing what is called legal terrorism.

Certificate under 65B of the Evidence Act in a Nutshell

What the Section 65B states

The Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA) states that the
information contained in an electronic record which is printed or
copied as computer output would be treated as a document without
further proof or production of the original, if the output satisfies
some stipulations stated below.

Burden of Proof under Indian Evidence Act

Introduction

The term burden of proof, which is not defined in the Indian Evidence Act, 1882, essentially refers to the legal responsibility of a party in a case to prove the existence of any fact as true in a judicial proceeding.

The burden of proof comes into play when a party wants from a court a judgment in regard to any legal right or liability dependent on some facts which need to be proved by him to the satisfaction of the court. In short, the burden of proof is an obligation that the law imposes on a party to produce evidence and prove it so as to satisfy the court in deciding the matter in his favour or otherwise.

Adultery and related Issues in Criminal Law

Adultery means different things in law and English language. In law, it is socially and legally objectionable sexual intercourse, voluntarily made by a man with the wife of another person, with the knowledge that she is a wife and without her husband’s consent or connivance. Therefore, adultery per se is not an offence. But when it is committed without the consent or connivance of the husband it becomes an offence.

Law relating to Bribe Giving & Bribe Taking

Everyone knows bribe taking by a public functionary is an offence but
some people do not know bribe giving is also an equally punishable
offence. There is no much clarity on how and in what manner bribe giving
becomes an offence. This article explores the architecture of the
offence of bribe giving but it cannot be explained without touching upon
the law relating to the offence of bribe taking as well.

Cancellation of Bail and Its Legalities

Introduction

The term bail refers to the judicial release of a person from custody.
The grant, refusal or cancellation of bail is a judicial act. It has to
be performed with utmost care by applying the mind or discretion of the
court.

Indian judiciary through many of its judgments unequivocally upholds that grant of bail is the rule and refusal of it is an exception. Every person is presumed to be innocent until the criminal charge against him is proved in a process of trial. Bail is a substantive right rather than a procedural one in tune with the citizen’s fundamental right to liberty.

The cancellation of bail means putting the presumably innocent but accused person again in detention in violation of his fundamental right to liberty, ensured under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Taking Cognizance under S. 190 CrPC means

What “taking cognizance” means

What is meant by taking cognizance in regard to an offence by a competent Magistrate is not defined or described in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) or any other act. However the term has acquired a definite connotation through well settled judicial pronouncements.

Contradiction & Omission in Cross Examination

Introduction

Contradictions between two statements of a witness play a crucial role
in deciding the fate of a criminal case or trial. Contradictions can be
categorised into two: direct contradictions and contradictions by
omissions. Making some sort of alterations or improvements in the prior
and later statements by a witness can also be termed as contradiction
and omission. Quite naturally, an interested witness may make some
improvements in his testimony of the incident under trial. In order to
avoid this, the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 lays down some procedures for
proving contradictions and omissions in a trial.

The contradictions or omissions can be proved in two stages. In the
first stage, the contradiction is brought on record as provided for in
the Indian Evidence Act. In the second stage the contradiction is then
proved by cross examining the Police Officer who has recorded the
statements under Section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
(CrPC). If the latter is not done, the contradictions or omissions
brought on record cannot be treated as proved before the court.