The extra-judicial confession not trustworthy cannot be used for corroboration of any other evidence; Heramba Brahma v. Statement made by accused Inala Sydayya on being arrested. Presumption as to Gazettes in electronic forms. Order of production and examination of witnesses 136. Statements made by — 1 by party interested in subject matter; persons who have any proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject-matter of the proceeding and who make the statement in their character of persons so interested; or 2 by person from whom interest derived; persons from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest in the subject-matter of the suit, are admissions, if they are made during the continuance of the interest of the persons making the statements. Production of documents or electronic records which another person, having possession, could refuse to produce.
Estoppel of tenant; and of licensee of person in possession. Illustrations A is accused of receiving stolen property knowing it to have been stolen. Production of documents which another person, having possession, could refuse to produce 132. Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document 100. Opinion as to existence of right or custom, when relevant.
If no evidence were given on either side, B would be entitled to retain his possession. Admissions by persons whose position must be proved as against party to suit 20. Therefore the burden of proof is on B. A has both models and modelling tools. An admission of an incriminating fact, howsoever grave, is not by itself a confession.
The fact that, it was posted in due course, and was not returned through the Dead Letter Office, are relevant. The fact of previous publications by A respecting B, showing ill- will on the part of A towards B, is relevant as proving A's intention to harm B's reputation by the particular publication in question. Explanation 1 The acceptor of a bill of exchange may deny that the bill was really drawn by the person by whom it purports to have been drawn. In case g , evidence may be given as to the general result of the documents by any person who has examined them, and who is skilled in the examination of such documents. Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trail for same offence — 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. On whom burden of proof lies 103.
Opinion as to handwriting, when relevant. The facts that, the dog had previously bitten X, Y and Z and that they had made complaints to B are relevant. Opinion on relationship, when relevant. Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved. Exclusion of evidence against application of document to existing facts. Indeed, the police appear to have dropped further proceedings.
This Explanation applies also to section 81A. A must prove the existence of those facts. State of Bihar, 1997 2 Crimes 146 Pat. Scope Section 112 read with section 4 really have the effect of completely closing and debarring the party from leading any evidence with respect to the fact which the law says that to be the conclusive proof of legitimacy and paternity of child covered by 112. Confession caused by inducement, threat or promise, when irrelevant in criminal proceeding.
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. Presence of document proved from the facts pleaded - Allowing secondary evidence not illegal; Sobha Rani v. If an admission of an accused is to be used against him, the whole of it should be tendered in evidence, and if part of the admission is exculpatory and part inculpatory, the prosecution is not at liberty to use in evidence the inculpatory part only. The information report as such is not substantive evidence. Each gives an account of the crime implicating D, and the accounts corroborate each other in such a manner as to render previous concert highly improbable; As to illustration c —A, the drawer of a bill of exchange, was a man of business. The case of the first contesting defendant, who is the first respondent before us now, is that these items of property exclusively belonged to him.
Sometimes the motive is clear and can be proved and sometimes the motive is shrouded in the mystery and it is very difficult to locate the same. Illustrations a A and B separately sue C for a libel which reflects upon each of them C in each case says that the matter alleged to libelous is true and the circumstances are such that it is probable true in each case, or in neither. Burden of proving death of person known to have been alive within thirty years. Vindhya Pradesh is a part of the State of Madhya Pradesh now, see Act 37 of 1956. Illustrations any area in which there has been, over a period of more than one month, extensive disturbance of the public peace, and it is shown that such person had been at a place in such area at a time when firearms or explosives were used at or from that place to attack or resist the members of any armed forces or the forces charged with the maintenance of public order acting in the discharge of their duties, it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is shown, that such person had committed such offence. If there is any such circumstance weakening such presumption, it cannot be ignored by the court; Sobha Hymavathi Devi v.
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. Moreover, a confession must either admit in terms the offence, or at any rate substantially all the facts which constitute the offence. Exception 2 — If a witness is asked any question tending to impeach his impartiality, and answers it by denying the facts suggested, he may be contradicted. Illustrations Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement. But the factual ingredients of that offence are materially different from those of an offence under the Customs Act. A may prove a verbal agreement that these terms were to include partial board.