Of Witnesses MCQ Quiz in తెలుగు - Objective Question with Answer for Of Witnesses - ముఫ్త్ [PDF] డౌన్‌లోడ్ కరెన్

The correct answer is T.J. Ponnam V. M.C. Verghese

Key Points

• This case is not related to confession, but instead deals with the admissibility of a letter written by a husband to his wife and the exceptions to marital privilege under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 122).
• It discusses whether communication between spouses can be used as evidence, not about the legal principles of confession.

Additional Information

• Pulukuri Kotayya v. King Emperor (1947)
  • Landmark case explaining Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, which deals with admissibility of confessions leading to the discovery of facts.
• State of U.P. v. Deoman Upadhyay (1960)
  • Related to confessional statements and Article 20(3) of the Constitution (protection against self-incrimination).
• State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad (1961)
  • Deals with the scope of testimonial compulsion under Article 20(3), especially in the context of confession and evidence gathering.

The correct answer is Competent witness

Key Points

• Section 120 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states:
  • “In all civil and criminal proceedings, the parties to the suit, and the husband or wife of any party to the suit, shall be competent witnesses.”
• Meaning of 'Competent Witness':
  • A competent witness is legally eligible to give evidence in court.
  • Competence is different from compellability. A competent witness can give evidence, while a compellable witness must give evidence if ordered by the court.
• Applicability in Criminal Cases:
  • A husband or wife of the accused is competent to testify either for or against the other spouse.
  • Consent is not required for being a competent witness.
• Example:
  • If a man is on trial for a crime, his wife can be called as a witness by either the prosecution or defence, provided she is willing to testify and not legally disqualified for any reason (like unsoundness of mind).

Additional Information 

• Option 2. Incompetent witness: Incorrect – Section 120 clearly states that spouses are competent witnesses.
• Option 3. Competent witness only if they are major and with the consent of other: Incorrect – No such age or consent condition is imposed under Section 120.
• Option 4. Competent witness only if they are sane and with the consent of other: Incorrect – Sanity is a general requirement for all witnesses under Section 118, but consent is not needed from the other spouse.

The correct answer is Section 128

Key Points

• Section 128 is a clarificatory provision that relates to professional communications between a client and legal professionals (advocates, pleaders, attorneys, vakils).
• What Section 128 States:
  • It states that nothing in Section 126 or Section 127 or Section 129 or any other provision (including Section 23) shall prevent a legal professional from being compelled to give evidence of a matter when legally required.
• Link to Section 23:
  • Section 23 bars the admissibility of admissions made under a promise of settlement. However, Section 128 removes this protection for lawyers when the law requires them to testify.
• Purpose:
  • Prevents misuse of legal privilege in communications when law mandates disclosure, ensuring the integrity of evidence is maintained in legal proceedings.
• Illustrative Case:
  • A lawyer cannot withhold disclosing a fact in court if the law specifically compels them, even if that fact was revealed in confidence during settlement negotiations.

Additional Information

• Option 1. Section 127: Incorrect – It only extends the rule of Section 126 to interpreters and clerks.
• Option 3. Section 129: Incorrect – It deals with the client’s right to refuse disclosure, not the professional’s obligation.
• Option 4. Section 126: Incorrect – It provides the general rule of privilege for professional communications but doesn't create the exception mentioned.

The correct answer is Section 123

Key Points

• The legal maxim "Salus Populi Suprema Lex" means "the welfare of the people is the supreme law."
• This principle is reflected in Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which deals with privileged documents related to affairs of the State.
• Key Points:
  • Protection of Public Interest: Section 123 restricts disclosure of unpublished official records related to State affairs if such disclosure is detrimental to public interest.
  • Authority's Discretion: Only the Head of the Department can give or deny permission to give evidence derived from such documents.
  • Purpose: To balance individual rights with national interest, in line with the maxim that public welfare prevails over individual justice.

Additional Information

• Section 121 – Deals with judges not being compelled to answer questions regarding their conduct in court.
• Section 122 – Relates to communications between spouses during marriage, considered privileged.
• Section 124 – Protects official communications made in confidence to public officers, but not necessarily tied to "salus populi suprema lex" as directly as Section 123.

The correct answer is 'Oral evidence'

Key Points

• Understanding oral evidence:
  • According to Section 119 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a dumb witness (a witness who is unable to speak) can provide evidence in court by writing or by using signs that can be understood.
  • Such evidence, when communicated in open court, is treated as oral evidence, provided it is intelligible and properly understood by the presiding officer of the court.
  • The rationale is that oral evidence refers to any evidence given by a witness in the form of spoken or communicated words, including through alternative methods like writing or gestures, in the courtroom.

Additional Information

• Explanation of other options:
  • Documentary evidence: This refers to evidence presented in the form of documents, such as written records, contracts, or other physical documents. The evidence provided by a dumb witness in open court is not considered documentary evidence because it is not a pre-existing document but rather a direct form of communication.
  • Written evidence: Written evidence generally refers to documents or written statements submitted as evidence, but it does not encompass written communication given live in court by a witness. The writing of a dumb witness in court is treated as oral evidence because it is equivalent to spoken testimony.
  • Any one of the above: This option is incorrect because the evidence of a dumb witness in open court is specifically classified as oral evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, and not any other form of evidence.

The correct answer is Section 134.

Key Points

• Section 134 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
  • Section 134 states that no particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required for the proof of any fact.
  • This implies that a conviction can be based on the testimony of a single witness if the court finds the testimony to be reliable and credible.
  • The principle emphasizes the quality of evidence rather than the quantity.

Additional Information

• Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act:
  • Section 133 deals specifically with the evidence of accomplices, stating that an accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person.
  • However, the conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.
• Section 119 of the Indian Evidence Act:
  • Section 119 addresses the competence of witnesses who are unable to speak.
  • It states that such witnesses may give their evidence in writing or by signs, which should be recorded in open court.
• None of the above:
  • This option is incorrect as Section 134 is the relevant provision that allows conviction based on the testimony of a single witness.

The correct answer is Section 119

Key Points

• The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 made significant amendments to various laws, including the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, in response to the recommendations of the Justice Verma Committee.
• Section 119 of the Indian Evidence Act was amended to provide that a dumb witness (who cannot speak) can give their evidence in any intelligible manner, including by writing or signs.
• If such a witness cannot communicate even through writing or signs, the court shall record the evidence through an interpreter, who must take an oath before interpreting.
• This amendment ensured that victims with speech impairments or other communication disabilities could effectively testify in court.

The correct answer is The communication is not protected from disclosure.

 Key Points

• Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
  • Provides privilege to communications made by a client to his legal adviser in the course of professional employment.
  • Such communications cannot be compelled to be disclosed in court.
• Exception to Privilege – Illegal or Criminal Purpose:
  • Section 126 does not protect communications made to facilitate or commit a crime or fraud.
  • If the communication is about using a forged deed (a criminal/fraudulent act), the privilege does not apply.
• Application to the Given Scenario:
  • Here, ‘A’ openly admits to using a forged deed, which is a criminal act.
  • Therefore, the communication loses protection under Section 126 and can be disclosed.
• Legal Policy:
  • The law aims to prevent misuse of the privilege to conceal criminal intentions.

Additional Information

• Option 1. The communication is protected from disclosure: Incorrect because privilege does not extend to communications made for committing crimes or fraud.
• Option 3. Limited protection can be granted: Incorrect as the law draws a clear line: no protection if communication is for criminal purpose.
• Option 4. This communication can be rejected: Incorrect because the communication is admissible as evidence to prove the criminal intention.

The correct answer is Any one of the above grounds

Key Points

• Section 118 lays down the general rule regarding who may testify as a witness:
• “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.
• Key Grounds for Incompetence to Testify:
  • Tender age:
    • If a child is too young to understand questions or respond logically, they may be deemed incompetent.
  • Extreme old age:
    • Advanced age can lead to cognitive decline making a person unable to understand or answer properly.
  • Disease of mind or body:
    • Mental illness or serious physical conditions (like inability to speak, hear, or respond coherently) can make one incompetent.
  • Any of the above individually is sufficient, depending on the court’s satisfaction.

​Additional Information

• Extreme old age: Incomplete – it's one of several grounds.
• Tender age and extreme old age: Incomplete – excludes disease or other conditions.
• Disease whether of mind or body: Also just one valid ground – not comprehensive.

The correct answer is That an accomplice is unworthy of credit

Key Points

• The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 recognizes certain presumptions under law — some are rebuttable (may be disproved), while others are conclusive.
• "That an accomplice is not unworthy of credit"
  • Correct – As per Section 133, an accomplice is a competent witness.
  • However, courts generally seek corroboration as a rule of prudence, not law.
• "That Judicial and Official Acts have been regularly performed"
  •  Correct – Covered under Section 114(e) of the Evidence Act.
  • Presumption exists that official duties are regularly performed.
• "That a common course of business has been followed in particular cases"
  • Correct – Covered under Section 114(f) – presumption related to routine conduct in business.

Additional Information

• "That an accomplice is unworthy of credit": Incorrect statement – The law does not presume that an accomplice is inherently unreliable.
• In fact, Section 133 says an accomplice shall be a competent witness, though caution is advised via Section 114(b).