Relevancy Of Facts MCQ Quiz - Objective Question with Answer for Relevancy Of Facts - Download Free PDF

The correct answer is Not relevant as conduct

Key Points

• Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act makes conduct relevant only when it is influenced by, or influences, a fact in issue and is sufficiently connected in time.
• A delayed statement made without filing a complaint is not considered spontaneous conduct, and hence, loses probative value as relevant conduct.
• In sexual offence cases, the timing and manner of the statement is crucial. A mere verbal statement made later, without it being part of res gestae or a formal complaint, is not relevant as conduct.

Additional Information

• Relevant as conduct: Only applies when the statement is immediate or part of the same transaction. Not applicable in delayed or non-complaint statements.
• Admissible as conduct:No such classification; admissibility depends on relevance under the Evidence Act.
• A subject matter of enquiry:Too broad and vague; the question is about evidentiary relevance, not the scope of inquiry.

The correct answer is Dying Declaration

Key Points

• The case of Kausal Rao v. State of Bombay (AIR 1958 SC 22) primarily deals with the admissibility and reliability of a dying declaration under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
• Facts of the Case:
  • The deceased had made a dying declaration naming the accused before her death. The issue was whether this declaration could be accepted without corroboration.
• Supreme Court’s Observation:
  • The Court held that a dying declaration can form the sole basis of conviction if it is found to be truthful, voluntary, and made in a fit mental state.
  • Corroboration is not mandatory if the dying declaration is credible.
• Section 32(1), Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — Deals with statements made by a person as to the cause of their death or circumstances relating to it.

Additional Information

• option 1. Confession: Not related — Confession involves voluntary admission of guilt by the accused under Sections 24–30, not applicable here.
• Option 2. Statement: Too broad — Though a dying declaration is a statement, this option is too generic and not specific to the core legal issue.
• Option 4. Evidence: Overgeneralized — The case involves dying declaration, a specific form of evidence, not the entire scope of “evidence”.

The correct answer is Revenue Jurisdiction

Key Points

• Section 41 – Relevancy of Certain Judgments:
• It deals with the relevancy and conclusive nature of final judgments from a competent court in certain types of jurisdictions.
• Conclusive Judgments:
  • Judgments are conclusive proof of legal character or title if passed by a competent court in:
  • Probate Jurisdiction (e.g., wills, succession)
  • Matrimonial Jurisdiction (e.g., marriage, divorce)
  • Admiralty Jurisdiction
  • Insolvency Jurisdiction
• Revenue Jurisdiction – 
  • Section 41 does not mention revenue jurisdiction, so judgments passed in matters like land revenue or tax are not conclusive under this section.

Additional Information

• Option 1. Probate Jurisdiction: Incorrect — it is mentioned in Section 41, covering matters related to wills and succession.
• Option 2. Matrimonial Jurisdiction: Incorrect — it is also included, covering legal status in marriage/divorce cases.
• Option 3. Insolvency Jurisdiction: Incorrect — it is expressly mentioned, covering judgments about insolvency status.

The correct answer is Section 32 (2)

Key Points

• Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
  • This section lays down the exceptions to the rule that hearsay is not admissible.
  • It permits statements made by persons who cannot be called as witnesses due to death or other reasons.
• Subsection (2) – Statement Made in the Course of Business
• Section 32(2) specifically allows statements made in the ordinary course of business to be admissible as evidence when the person who made the statement is unavailable.
• Illustrative Example:
  • If a deceased accountant regularly recorded ledger entries as part of his duties, those entries may be admitted under this clause.
• Purpose:
  • Ensures that routine business records, entries, or declarations by deceased persons or others who can't be called as witnesses can still be used as reliable documentary evidence.

Additional Information 

• Option 1. Section 32(1): Relates to dying declarations, not business records.
• Option 3. Section 32(4): Deals with statements about the existence of relationships, not course of business.
• Option 4. Section 32(7): Concerns statements in documents related to transactions, not declarations made during business operations.

The correct answer is Relevant Fact 

Key Points

• Legal Provision: Section 47A of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
• This section was inserted to deal with electronic signatures.
• It states that when the court has to form an opinion as to the electronic signature of any person, the opinion of the Certifying Authority which issued the Electronic Signature Certificate is a relevant fact.
• Why it is a Relevant Fact:
  • It assists the court in forming an inference or conclusion regarding the authenticity of the electronic signature.
  • As per the Evidence Act, relevant facts help prove or disprove the existence of a fact in issue.
• Role of Certifying Authority:
  • A Certifying Authority is authorized under the Information Technology Act, 2000 to issue Digital Signature Certificates.
  • Their opinion holds evidentiary value when verifying signatures.
• Example:
  • If someone disputes an electronically signed contract, the court may consider the opinion of the certifying authority who issued the signature certificate as relevant evidence.

Additional Information

• Option 1. Fact in issue: This refers to the main facts directly in dispute (e.g., whether a contract was signed). The opinion of a certifying authority is not a fact in issue itself.
• Option 3. Proved fact: Something becomes a proved fact only after it is established in court. The opinion itself is a type of evidence, not automatically a proved fact.
• Option 4. None of the above:  Incorrect, because "Relevant fact" is explicitly recognized in Section 47A.

The correct answer is option 3Key Points

•  A dying declaration is a statement made by a person who is in a condition of anticipation of death, and it relates to the cause of their death or the circumstances leading to their death.
• Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, addresses the admissibility of dying declarations.
• Section 32 of Indian Evidence Act 1872 deal with cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant.
• It says 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

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

• The report of a Medical Officer typically contains professional observations, diagnoses, and assessments regarding the injuries sustained by the victim. This information can be highly relevant in establishing the nature, extent, and cause of the injuries, as well as providing insight into the victim's condition at the time of examination.
• Such reports are usually considered reliable and credible evidence because they are based on the expertise and observations of trained medical professionals.
• Section 45 of Indian Evidence Act 1872 deals with opinions of experts.
• When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science, or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, or in questions as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts.
• Such persons are called experts. 

The correct answer is Option 2.

Key Points

•  A weapon is recovered on the basis of the statement made by the accused during the investigation of another case it is admissible under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. 

Additional Information

• Section 27 of the Evidence Act is based on the doctrine of confirmation by subsequent events – a fact is actually discovered in consequence of the information given, which results in recovery of a physical object. The facts discovered and the recovery is an assurance that the information given by a person accused of the offence can be relied.
• In State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu alias Afsan Guru 2005 , this Court affirmed that the fact discovered within the meaning of Section 27 of the Evidence Act must be some concrete fact to which the information directly relates. Further, the fact discovered should refer to a material/physical object and not to a pure mental fact relating to a physical object disassociated from the recovery of the physical object 

The correct answer is Section 2(f) of the Indian Succession Act 

Key Points

•  In the Indian Succession Act of 1925, Section 2(f) defines "probate" as a certified copy of a Will, officially authenticated under the seal of a Court that possesses the requisite legal authority.
• This certification is accompanied by a grant of administration to the estate of the testator. In simpler terms, a probate, as per this section, is a verified duplicate of a Will, endorsed by a competent court's seal, and includes the legal authorization for administering the deceased person's estate.

Additional Information

• Section 41 of the Indian Evidence Act delineates the relevance of final judgments from courts exercising:-
  • probate,
  • matrimonial,
  • admiralty, or
  • insolvency jurisdictions.
• According to this section, such judgments hold significance because they:
  • Confer or withdraw legal character from any person.
  • Declare a person's entitlement to a legal character.
  • Serve as conclusive proof of certain matters.

The section distinguishes between two types of jurisdiction:

 

• Judgments in Rem: These are judgments that not only affect the parties involved but also have implications for the entire world. Section 41 specifically addresses matters related to probate, matrimonial, admiralty, and insolvency jurisdictions.
• Judgments in Personam: These are ordinary judgments that do not impact the status of any subject matter or person. They only bind the parties to the suit.

 

Section 41 further explains the application of this principle to various jurisdictions:

• Probate Jurisdiction: This pertains to the validation of a will, and when probate is granted, it establishes the legal character of the individual.
• Matrimonial Jurisdiction: Judgments in matrimonial courts, such as those related to divorce or nullity of marriage, are considered judgments in Rem.
• Admiralty Jurisdiction: This jurisdiction deals with maritime claims within the territorial waters of respective High Courts.
• Insolvency Jurisdiction: This special jurisdiction should only extend as far as necessary for administering insolvency law.

 

 Additional InformationIn the case of Surendra Kumar v. Gyanchand (1975), the Supreme Court emphasized that a probate court's judgment, granting probate of a will, should be presumed to have been obtained in accordance with prescribed legal procedures, and it is considered a judgment in Rem.

The correct answer is option 1.

Key Points

• The term "Res Gestae" literally means, 'things done'.
•  Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 essentially states that facts which are not the main subject of dispute but are closely connected to the main fact in question and form part of the same transaction are considered relevant.
• These connected facts can be admitted as evidence, whether they happened at the same time and place or at different times and places.
• The idea behind this provision is to allow the court to consider all relevant facts that are closely linked to the main issue at hand, ensuring a more comprehensive understanding of the circumstances surrounding a case. It helps in presenting a complete and accurate picture of the events in question.

Additional Information

•   Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction.—Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places.
• The term res gestae is an English term. This term is equivalent to Indian rule of circumstantial evidence. The term
  “same transaction” is called res gestae.
• Relevancy of the facts of same transaction is an exception to the rule of hearsay evidence as well as the rule of best evidence.
• In the case of Sawal Das vs. State of Bihar, during the trial the FIR lodged by the neighbor was held admissible as part of the same transaction.

The correct option is Option 2.

Key Points

• Opinions of experts
  • Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act talks about the opinion of the experts.
  • Section 45 says "When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science or art or as to the identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art or in questions as to the identity of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts".
  • These persons are called the experts.
  • The opinion of the experts are advisory in nature 
  • The judge can form an opinion contrary to that of expert since the opinion of expert is only advisory in nature.
• Illustrations:-
  1. The death of Anurag was caused by poison. The opinions of experts as to the symptoms produced by the poison by which Anurag is supposed to have died are relevant.
  2. Mr Amit is an unsoundness of mind at the time of doing a certain act but is capable of knowing the nature of the act or that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to the law.
     • Opinions of experts upon the question of whether the symptoms exhibited by Mr Amit commonly show unsoundness of mind, and unsoundness of mind usually renders persons incapable of knowing the nature of the acts which they do or knowing that what they do is either wrong or contrary to law are relevant. 
  3. A certain document was written by Abhishek. Another document is produced which is proved or admitted to have been written by Abhishek. The opinion of experts on the question of whether the two documents were written by the same person or by different persons is relevant.
• Conflict of opinion of the experts:-
  • When a conflict arises between the opinions of the experts, then the Court is competent to form its own opinion about signatures on a document.

Additional Information

•  Prem Sagar Manocha v. NCT of Delhi(2016).

• • In this case, the question that arose was can an expert be tried for perjury?
  • This question was discussed in this case.
  • This case was about the ballistic expert in the Jessica Lal murder case.
  • In this case, the defence said that there was another man at the crime scene other than the accused who fired due to which Jessica Lal was killed.
  • The ballistic expert said that no bullets had been fired by two different guns.
  • But he also said that he is not saying anything conclusively and all this is just his opinion.
  • Later when the accused was convicted and it was proved that the accused was the one who fired the gun the ballistic expert was convicted of perjury.
  • On appeal to the Supreme Court, the Apex Court quashed the order for perjury saying that an expert is not a witness we only take his opinion.

The correct answer is Option 1.

Key Points

•  According to clause(2) of Section 32 when a statement made by a person in course of business and in particular:

1. When it consists of any entry or memorandum made by him in book kept in ordinary course of business; or
2. In discharge of professional duty: or
3. When it consists of acknowledgement written by him or written by someone and signed by him of the receipt of money, goods, securities or property of any kind; or
4. When it consists of a documents used in commerce written or signed by him; or
5. When it consists of a date of letter or other document usually dated, written or signed by him.

• The statement is relevant. Illustrations (b), (c), (d) and (g) speak for themselves.
• When the date of birth is in question. An entry in the diary of a deceased surgeon regularly kept in the course of business stating that on particular day he attended a lady who delivered her of a child, it is relevant [Illustration (b)]

Additional Information

•  Sections 32 and 33 of the Evidence Act are exceptions to the general rule that hearsay evidence is not admissible
• According to section 32, any words written or verbal statements of relevant facts made by a person:—
• Who is dead;
• Who cannot be found;
• Who has become impossible of giving evidence; or
• Whose attendance cannot be procured without unreasonable delay or expense, are relevant under the following circumstances of the case:

1.  When it relates to the cause of his death, or
2. When it is made in course of business, or
3.  When it is made against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the maker, or
4.  When it gives opinion as to right, custom or matters of general interest, or
5. When it relates to the existence of any relationships, or
6. When it is made in will or deed or other document to family affairs or
7. When it is made in document relating to transaction mentioned in Section 13, Clause (1), or
8. When it is made by several persons, and expresses feelings to the matter in question.

The correct answer is option 4.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 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).