English

Principle: Oral Evidence Must Always Be Direct I.E. of the Person Who Says He Saw the Event and Hearsay Evidence is No Evidence. Facts: X Was Told by Y (Whom X Trusts) that Z Has Murdered a

Advertisements
Advertisements

Question

Principle: Oral evidence must always be direct i.e. of the person who says he saw the event and hearsay evidence is no evidence.

Facts: X was told by Y (whom X trusts) that Z has murdered A.

Options

  • Statement of X is admissible 

  • Statement of X is not admissible because he has not seen Z murdering A 

  • Statement of X is admissible because he trusts Y and Y never tells a lie 

  • Statement of X is admissible because he is a renowned social activist and has a huge reputation to fight for the truth 

MCQ
Advertisements

Solution

Statement of X is not admissible because he has not seen Z murdering A 

Explanation:

Statement of X is not admissible because he has not seen Z murdering A. It is clearly stated in the principle that oral evidence must be direct. It means X must state only what X saw not what X heard from someone. X  has not seen Z murdering A. X has only heard it from Y.  Therefore, X’s statement cannot be admissible.   

shaalaa.com
Indian Penal Code (Entrance Exams)
  Is there an error in this question or solution?
2018-2019 (May) Set 1

RELATED QUESTIONS

Direction : The passage given below is followed by a set of question. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.

Juvenile delinquency is defined as "the habitual committing of criminal acts or offenses by a young person, especially one below the age at which ordinary criminal prosecution is possible." These acts are committed mostly by teenagers, cumulative in today's civilization, which is a very concerning matter and cannot be snubbed. The more concerning matter is that generations of youth are believed to be the future of the world. Their behavior shows how tomorrow's future will be.

Juvenile delinquency has become a major problem, and only by addressing the basics can it be tackled. Attention towards co-curricular activities should be given to mold the child in the right and engaging way. The more he is forced to obey rules at school, diktats at home, mores of the society, the more he will escape to criminal acts in order to vent out his frustration. Forcing him will only make him hate it all. Hence, the approach should be to make exercises of discipline, etiquette, and moral sense interesting. This is where cocurricular activities come into play.

Juvenile offenders have the same set of constitutional guarantees as an adult, such as a fair trial. But very often, adult offenders are able to secure bail faster than a juvenile offender. Merely because the juvenile is not punished, it can in no way take away his/her constitutional guarantees of liberty. The only difference is that, unlike adult offenders, the state must protect, and ultimately rehabilitate, juvenile offenders. But protection cannot become custody. Also, the statute stresses on privacy as a right for the juvenile offender. But in the garb of privacy, there is very little effort for scrutiny and transparency in the process. The statute focuses on necessary infrastructure with significant involvement of informal systems, specifically the family, voluntary organizations, and the community, to provide a system separate from the criminal justice system. For this to become a reality, we must build effective linkages between districts and states, among various government agencies in association with child rights groups, along with effective legal services for the children and their families. Otherwise, juvenile justice will become a poor copy of the criminal justice system, only hardening the children caught in it.

Therefore, the Juvenile Justice law should address the issues relating to children alleged and found to be in conflict with law and children in need of care and protection by catering to their basic needs through proper care, protection, development, treatment, social re-integration, by adopting a child-friendly approach in the adjudication and disposal of matters in the best interest of children and for their rehabilitation through processes provided, and institutions and bodies established.

Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text


Consists of legal proposition(s)/  principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this Section. In other words, in answering these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every question.  
Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest in the study of law, research aptitude, and problem-solving ability, even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of the law.  
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. 

Principle: Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code provides that ‘When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.’

Facts: Three vagabonds, Sanju, Dilbag, and Sushil decided to commit burglary. In the night, Sushil opened the lock and they broke into a rich man’s house when the entire family was on a pilgrimage. Sanju had gone to that house earlier in connection with some cleaning job. Ther e was only a servant lady in the house. Hearing some sounds from the master bedroom, the servant switched on the lights and went up to the room from where she heard the sound. Noticing that the servant was going to cry for help, Sanju grabbed her and covered her mouth with his hands and dragged her into the nearby room. The other two were collecting whatever they could from the room. When they were ready to go out of the house, they looked for Sanju and found him committing rape on the servant. They all left the house and the servant reported the matter to the police and identified Sanju. Subsequently, all three were arrested in connection with the offences of housebreaking, burglary, and rape. Identify the legal liability of the three.


Mark the best option:
Principle:

  1. Every person has a right to defend his own body, and the body of any other person, against any offence affecting the human body.
  2. The right of private defence in no case extends to inflicting more harm than necessary for the purpose of defence.

Facts: Rajendra, a police inspector; saw two men on motorbikes; one armed with a stick and the other armed with a scythechasing a boy and warned them to stop harassing the boy however they continued pursuing the boy. Rajendra who was carrying a loaded revolver (and nothing else) shot the man carrying a stick on head thereby killing him instantly and the other carrying a scythe on his legs causing him to fall down. Decide Rajendra's liability based on the facts mentioned above.

Decide Rajendra's liability based on the facts mentioned above.


Mark the best option:
Capital offences result in


Which one of the following is not essential for an offence?


Who is the author of the ancient book on economics, Arthashastra?


A intentionally causes Z’s death, partly by illegally omitting to give Z food, and partly by beating Z.


The following is a document


Answer the question which follows form the application of the under mentioned legal principle.

Principle: False imprisonment is a total restraint of the liberty of a person, for however short a time, without lawful excuse.

A was suspected of having committed the murder of B. C, a policeman who was investigating into B's murder saw A in a market. He went up to him, caught hold of his hand and prevented him from going anywhere.


A handed over ₹5,000 to her neighbour B, who was an employee of a bank, and asked him to deposit the money in her account, instead of doing so, B spent the money. A sues the bank for damages.


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×