Topic
Evidence law in India governs the admissibility, relevance, and evaluation of proof in judicial proceedings under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and procedural statutes like the CPC and CrPC.
Delhi HC condones 67-day delay in chamber appeal, sets aside order closing mortgagee bank's right to lead evidence, directs Joint Registrar to grant fresh opportunity.
Delhi HC holds that a plaintiff cannot claim 'subsequent discovery' of records always in its custody by deferring search, defeating 'reasonable cause' under Order XI Rule 1(5) CPC. This ruling impacts trademark suits, where filing similar documents with the plaint and multiple tranches of disclosure can be deemed unreasonable.
The Gujarat High Court affirmed the acquittal of the accused after medical evidence revealed no axe-blow injury, contradicting ocular testimony of fatal head trauma. It held that in acquittal appeals under Section 378 CrPC, the double presumption of innocence requires acquittal to be upheld unless the prosecution proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt, benefiting accused facing conflicting eyewitness and medical evidence.
Unchallenged WhatsApp messages alone can prove mental cruelty under HMA Sec 13(1)(i-a), the Chhattisgarh HC ruled, overturning the Family Court’s denial of divorce. The decision confirms that uncontested electronic evidence suffices for matrimonial relief, impacting spouses seeking divorce on cruelty grounds.
CESTAT Kolkata held that statements cannot be admitted without examination in chief under Section 9D CEA, annulling a Rs 4.34 crore excise demand in a clandestine clearance case. The decision strengthens protections for taxpayers in excise proceedings.
HP HC held that under BNSS §432, prosecution may submit a matriculation certificate as additional evidence to prove a victim's age in a POCSO case at the appellate stage if it supports the case. This clarifies age-proof evidence rules in POCSO trials.
The Supreme Court set aside the POCSO conviction for lack of proof of the victim's minority via JJ Act documents or ossification test. It upheld the accused's IPC 376 rape conviction, confirming the offence was proved despite the POCSO charge failing.
The Gauhati HC held that rejecting a Section 311 CrPC witness-summoning petition may be an intermediate order if it affects the final judgment, allowing a Section 397 CrPC revision to challenge such denial of vital witness evidence.
The Delhi High Court set aside a ₹8.4 lakh decree for a commission agent, holding that an internal account statement not filed with the plaint is inadmissible under Order VII Rule 14 CPC. The agent must independently prove actual supply of X-ray films to government departments to claim commission; a limitation plea raised for the first time in appeal was rejected.
The Supreme Court set aside murder convictions of six accused, ruling that inconsistent eyewitness accounts and the absence of forensic proof failed to meet the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt under the IPC. This underscores that corroborative evidence is essential for murder charges, affecting future prosecutions relying solely on eyewitnesses.
By accepting the parties’ admission of signatures, the Delhi HC declared the 1994-95 promissory notes genuine, invoking Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The decision confirms that statutory presumption of authenticity trumps handwriting doubts, guiding future forgery challenges.
A Punjab & Haryana HC revision set aside a lower court’s acceptance of a photocopied property verification report, ruling that under Section 65 the party must first establish why the original document cannot be produced. This clarifies that secondary evidence cannot be admitted on mere assertion, impacting litigants relying on copies in civil property disputes.
The Punjab & Haryana HC reduced the death penalty for the rape-murder of a 7-year-old to life imprisonment with a mandatory fifty-year minimum and imposed fines of Rs 50 lakh and Rs 23 lakh. It also ruled that CCTV footage without a Section 65B certificate is inadmissible, raising evidentiary standards in grave sexual-offence cases.
The Supreme Court overturned the ten-year rigourous imprisonment, restoring the trial court’s acquittal because the medical and forensic reports failed to establish the offence beyond reasonable doubt. This underscores that rape prosecutions must be backed by conclusive forensic proof, affecting all pending Section 376 IPC cases.
The Allahabad High Court set aside the murder convictions of Munua Singh and Raj Bahadur Singh, holding that a child’s testimony never examined under Section 161 CrPC cannot meet the ‘sterling quality’ threshold required for evidence. This decision warns that unexamined child witnesses render convictions unsafe, impacting all pending cases that rely on such testimony.