Ad Code

Recent Posts

6/recent/ticker-posts

Edward s/o Petro v. R. Crim. App. 405-M-67, 18/8/67, Cross J.



Edward s/o Petro v. R. Crim. App. 405-M-67, 18/8/67, Cross J.

Accused was convicted of stealing a bed. The bed was produced in court and identified by the complainant, but it was not tendered and admitted into evidence as an exhibit.

            Held: Section 61 of the Evidence Act, 1967, provides, “All facts except the contents of documents may be proved by oral evidence.” Even if an article is not produced in court, that factor affects only the weight – not the admissibility – of oral evidence concerning the article. [Citing Woodroffe and Amar Ali, Law of Evidence Applicable to British India (7th Ed.), comments to section 59 of the Indian Evidence Act (from which section 61 was derived).] Where, as here, the article was produced in court, was identified, and there was ample opportunity to examine it, the failure to admit if as an exhibit would not even affect the weight of the evidence.

Post a Comment

0 Comments