Evidence Act Questions ca icsi123456.pptx

hi

1. Questions Evidence Act

2. Question 24] A given consent to be a prosecution witness ina bribery case before a police office. The police officer assures A that if he states the facts of the crime as explained in police post he will not be prosecuted in the Court. A agrees to abide. When A was produced before the Magistrate as wit-ness, A refuses to be an approver in the case. Can the police officer produce tape-recorded consent of A which he gave at the police post to prove the crime of bribery against B before the Magistrate to hold B responsible for the crime of bribery and to punish him.

3. Ans.: As per Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a confession is irrelevant as an admission if itis made to a person in authority in consequence of some inducement, threat or promise held out by him in reference to the charge against the accused. The Police officer cannot produce the tape recorded consent of A for becoming approver to prove the crime of bribery against B. The Magistrate will reject the tape recorded consent of A because the consent was obtained by inducement/promise made by the police officer.

4. Question 27| A murder is committed on a dark night. Nobody is named as the murderer. The sub-inspector of police goes to the locality to investigate. While he is investigating, one B comes to him and says it was he who committed the murder. After that B is arrested and becomes the accused in the case and is tried for the offence of murder. Discuss the validity of the aforesaid statement of B.

5. Ans.: As per Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, no confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence. Hence B's confession will not be admissible at the trial because at the time of proving the confession, B had become an accused and the confession was made to police officer.

6. Question 30] A Police officer overhears a confession made by Raman to his friend Sanjay while they were conversing in a park. Can the police officer be permitted to give evidence of this confession?

7. Ans.: As per Section 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, 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. In the given case, the accused Raman has not made any confession to the police officer directly nor was he in the police custody when the police officer overheard the confession. Therefore, it is not a confession made to police officer and as such, the bar of admissibility of evidence of confession contained in Section26, is not applicable. Therefore, the police officer will be permitted to give evidence of the confession made by Raman, the accused, to his friend Sanjay.

8. Question 31] A, an accused charged with the offence of murder of B, while in police custody made confession before a Civil Judge. Is this confession relevant and admissible?

9. Ans.: According to Section 26 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, no confession made by any person while he is in the custody of police officer, shall be proved against such person. The only exception to this rule is that if such a confession was made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate, it shall be proved against its maker. In the given problem the confession is made in the immediate presence of a Civil Judge and not that ofa Magistrate. Hence, the confession is not admissible.

10. Question 33] A is charged with the murder of B. He is arrested and taken into custody of the sub-inspector of police in charge of the investigation. A stated before the said sub-inspector of police and he goes to the well with some independent witnesses and takes out the dead body of B at the instance of A. Whether A's statement can be proved against him?

11. Ans.: As per Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequences of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether if amounts to a confessions or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved. In given case A is charged with the murder of B. He is arrested and taken into custody and he stated before the police officer that he killed B and threw his dead body in a well. Consequently, the police officer goes to the well and takes out the body. The facts stated in the problem satisfy all the conditions laid down in Section 27 in order to prove the statement of A against him. Therefore, A's statement can be proved against him.

12. Question 36] A is on his trial for the murder of C. There is evidence to show that C was murdered by A and B, and that B said- "A and I murdered C".

13. Ans.: According to Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, when more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of such persons is proved, the Court may take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well as against the person who makes such confession. Facts of given case are same to one of the illustration given in Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.A is on his trial for the murder of C, there is evidence to show that C was murdered by A and B, and that B said- "A and I murdered C". This statement may not be taken into consideration by the Court against A, as B is not being jointly tried.

14. Question 37] Antony and Tony are co-accused of the crime of kidnapping and murdering a child. Antony denies the charges but Tony confesses that he along with Anthony has committed the crime. How far is the statement made by Tony relevant against Anthony?

15. Ans.: According to Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, when more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of such persons is proved, the Court may take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well as against the person who makes such confession. In given case Antony and Tony are co-accused of the crime and if they are jointly tried then confession of Tony may be taken into consideration against Tony as well as against the Antony.

16. Question 38) Anand is on his trial for the murder of Chanchal. There is evidence to show that Chanchal was murdered by Anand and Birender and that Birender said, "Anand and I murdered Chanchal." Can the Court take into consideration this statement against Anand? Will your reply be different in case there is joint trial against Anand and Birender ? Give reasons.

17. Ans.: According to Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, when more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of such persons is proved, the Court may take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well as against the person who makes such confession. In given case Anand and Birender are not jointly tried hence Court cannot take into consideration this statement given by Birender against Anand. If they are jointly tried then Court may take into consideration confession of Birender as against Anand as well as Birernder .