Relevancy Of Facts MCQ Quiz in मल्याळम - Objective Question with Answer for Relevancy Of Facts - സൗജന്യ PDF ഡൗൺലോഡ് ചെയ്യുക

The correct answer is option 4.
Key Points

• Section 32 Sub-section (1) of Indian Evidence Act 1872 based on Latin maxim "Nemo moriturus praesumitur mentiri," which translates to "a person who is about to die is presumed to tell the truth."
• Section 32 states, 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: ––
  • (1) When it relates to cause of death- 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.
• In "K. Ramachandra Reddy v. The Public Prosecutor"  Supreme Court emphasized the importance and reliability of dying declarations as substantive evidence, provided they meet the necessary criteria. The judgment reaffirmed that a dying declaration can be the sole basis for conviction if it is found to be truthful, voluntary, and made under a sense of impending death. This case further solidified the significance of dying declarations in criminal trials in India.

 Additional Information

• Under Section 33 Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to take it, is relevant  in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, for proving the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable But,
  • Proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest;
  • Adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine;
  • Questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding. 

The correct answer is Option 1

Key Points

•  The constitutional validity of S. 27 of the Art. was challenged in State of U.P. v. Deoman Upadhyaya.
•  It was argued that the said section was ultra vires the Constitution, in as much as it was violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, on the ground that it discriminated between persons in police custody and those not in such custody.
• The SC held that section 27 is an exception of Section 25 and 26 and also it doesn’t violate article 14 of the constitution as article 14 validates a reasonable classification and classification under section 25 and 26.

Additional Information

• Section 27 of the act said that if accused confess anything and it comes to the category of confession, and by this confession, any new facts discovered then that fact can be presumed to be true and not to have been extracted. It mainly comes into action when-
• Section 25 -The confession is made in front of the police. 
•  Section 26 -The confession is made in police custody.
• Section 27 is based on the doctrine of confirmation by subsequent events, since every part of the statement, made at the instance of the accused in police custody, must be confirmed by an event of discovery, later on, to be admissible at trial
• In the case of State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad, the Supreme Court held that section 27 doesn’t violate Article 20(3)

The correct answer is Option 3.

Key Points

• According to Section 28 of the Indian Evidence Act, if a confession is made after the impression caused by any inducement, threat, or promise has been fully removed, it is considered relevant.
• If someone is induced, threatened, or promised something to make a confession, but later, in the opinion of the Court, the influence of that inducement, threat, or promise is fully removed, any confession made thereafter becomes relevant and admissible in court.
• For example, if a person is coerced into confessing to a crime under threat of harm, but later, when the threat is removed, they voluntarily confess again, this second confession would be considered relevant and admissible in court because it was made after the influence of the threat was fully removed.

Key Points

• Section 40 of the Indian Evidence Act states that the existence of any judgment, order, or decree which legally prevents any court from taking cognizance of a suit or holding a trial is considered a relevant fact.
• This means that when determining whether a court should take cognizance of a suit or hold a trial, the court should consider any previous judgments, orders, or decrees that legally bar the initiation of a second suit or trial on the same matter.
• For example, if a court has previously dismissed a suit on a particular matter, and a party tries to initiate a second suit on the same matter, the existence of the previous judgment would be relevant in determining whether the court should proceed with the second suit.

The correct answer is Option 3.

Key Points

•  Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with the Opinion of Experts. 
•  When the court needs to form an opinion on:
  • A point of foreign law,
  • A point of science or art, or
  • The identity of handwriting or finger impressions,
• The opinions of persons who are specially skilled in these areas are considered relevant facts. These persons are referred to as experts.
• For example, if there is a dispute regarding the authenticity of a signature on a document, the opinion of a handwriting expert would be considered relevant evidence.

The correct answer is Option 3.

Key Points

• Section 16 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with the Existence of a course of business when relevant.
• It says, when there is a question whether a particular act was done, the existence of any course of business, according to which it naturally would have been done, is a relevant fact. 
• For example, if a question arises whether a payment was made by a company to its supplier, the regular course of business, such as maintaining financial records or payment receipts, would be relevant in determining whether the payment was indeed made.

The correct answer is option 3.Key Points

•  Section 45A of Indian Evidence Act 1872 deals with  Opinion of Examiner of Electronic Evidence.
• It says when in a proceeding, the court has to form an opinion on any matter relating to any information transmitted or stored in any computer resource or any other electronic or digital form, the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence referred to in section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), is a relevant fact.
• Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, an Examiner of Electronic Evidence shall be an expert. 

The correct answer is option 3.Key Points

•  Section 33 of Indian Evidence Act 1872 deals with Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, the truth of facts therein stated.
• Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable:
  • Provided that the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest; that the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine; that the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding.
• Explanation.––A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of this section. 

The correct answer is option 3.Key Points

• In the given case, the particulars of a dispute between A and B about a matter unconnected with the alleged libel are considered irrelevant because they do not directly relate to the facts in issue, namely the alleged libel and its truthfulness.
• Section 9 of Indian EVidence Act 1872 deals with 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. 

The correct answer is option 4.Key Points

•   The definition of "facts in issue" includes facts from which the existence, non-existence, nature, or extent of any right, liability, or disability asserted or denied in a suit or proceeding necessarily follows. Hearsay evidence, however, is generally not admissible as it is considered unreliable.
• Section 2 of Indian Evidence Act 1872 define “Facts in issue”.
• It says 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.
• Explanation.––Whenever, under the provisions of the law for the time being in force relating to Civil Procedure,  any Court records an issue of fact, the fact to be asserted or denied in the answer to such issue is a fact in issue. hey chatgpt please at as an examiner and make mcqs with and & explanation for judiciary exam