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

The correct answer is option 4.

 Key PointsSection 5 of IEA says Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts
Evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence or non-existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others.
Explanation.-- This section shall not enable any person to give evidence of a fact which he is disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force relating to Civil Procedure1.
Illustrations
(a) A is tried for the murder of B by beating him with a club with the intention of causing his death.
At A's trial the following facts are in issue:--
A's beating B with the club;
A's causing Bs death by such beating;
A's intention to cause Bs death.

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 2.Key Points

• Section 53A of Indian Evidence Act 1872 deals with Evidence of character or previous sexual experience not relevant in certain cases.
• In a prosecution for an offence under section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or for attempt to commit any such offence, where the question of consent is in issue, evidence of the character of the victim or of such person’s previous sexual experience with any person shall not be relevant on the issue of such consent or the quality of consent.
• Section 53 was inserted by Act 13 of 2013, s. 25 (w.e.f. 3-2-2013).

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 The content matches what was sent

Key Points

• Section 88A of the Evidence Act allows the Court to presume that an electronic message forwarded by the originator to the addressee through an electronic mail server corresponds with the message as it was input into the computer for transmission. This means that unless evidence suggests otherwise, it is presumed that the content of the message has not been altered during transmission. However, the Act specifically states that no presumption should be made about the identity of the sender, hence, the Court does not assume who exactly sent the message, just that the content remains as it was originally sent.