Skip to main content

CHAPTER XXV EVIDENCE IN INQUIRIES AND TRIALS

 

307. Language of Courts

  • State Government's Power:

    • Determines the language for each court within the state (excluding the High Court).

308. Evidence to be Taken in Presence of Accused

  • General Rule:

    • Evidence must be recorded in the presence of the accused.

  • Exceptions:

    • If the accused’s attendance is waived, evidence can be recorded with their advocate present (via audio-video if needed).

  • Special Case (Victims of Sexual Offense):

    • For victims under 18 in rape/sexual offense cases, measures ensure the accused isn’t directly confronted while maintaining the right to cross-examination.

  • Definition:

    • “Accused” includes individuals in proceedings under Chapter IX.

309. Record in Summons Cases and Inquiries

  • Summons Cases & Inquiries (Sections 164–167):

    • Magistrate makes a memorandum of witness evidence in the court’s language.

  • If Magistrate Unable:

    • Records reason and allows another to write the memorandum.

  • Signature:

    • Memorandum signed by the Magistrate, forming part of the official record.

310. Record in Warrant Cases

  • Evidence Recording:

    • Written by Magistrate or from dictation; if unable, by a court officer under supervision.

  • Audio-Video Recording:

    • Allowed with the accused’s advocate present.

  • Certificate:

    • Magistrate certifies if unable to record evidence themselves.

  • Form:

    • Usually narrative but may be in Q&A form at the Magistrate’s discretion.

  • Signature:

    • Signed by the Magistrate and becomes part of the official record.

311. Record in Trials Before Court of Session

  • Evidence Recording:

    • By the presiding Judge or under supervision of a court officer.

  • Narrative or Q&A:

    • Judge’s discretion to choose the format.

  • Signature:

    • Signed by the presiding Judge and added to the official record.

312. Language of Record of Evidence

  • Same Language as Court:

    • If the witness speaks the court’s language, record in that language.

  • Different Language:

    • Record in the witness’s language if possible; otherwise, provide an accurate translation in the court’s language.

  • Translation Requirements:

    • If evidence is in English, translation isn’t mandatory unless required by parties.

313. Procedure After Evidence Completion

  • Reading Evidence:

    • Read to the witness in the presence of the accused or their advocate for verification and correction.

  • Dispute in Accuracy:

    • If the witness disputes accuracy, a note of the objection is made instead of corrections.

  • Language Barrier:

    • If the witness doesn’t understand the record language, it must be interpreted in the original language of testimony.

314. Interpretation of Evidence to Accused/Advocate

  • For Accused:

    • If evidence is in an unfamiliar language, interpreted in open court.

  • For Advocate:

    • If the advocate doesn’t understand the language, the court must interpret it.

  • Documents:

    • The court may interpret as much as necessary for formal proof.

315. Remarks on Witness's Demeanor

  • Demeanor Notes:

    • Magistrates/Judges record observations on the witness’s behavior during examination.

316. Record of Examination of Accused

  • Complete Record:

    • All questions and answers during the accused’s examination must be recorded fully.

  • Language:

    • In the language of the examination or the court’s language if not practicable.

  • Verification:

    • Read back to the accused; if needed, interpreted if they don’t understand the language.

  • Signature:

    • Signed by both the accused and the Judge/Magistrate, certifying accuracy.

  • Electronic Communication:

    • If examined remotely, signature must be obtained within 72 hours.

  • Exclusions:

    • Doesn’t apply to summary trials.

317. Interpreter’s Duty

  • Honest Interpretation:

    • Interpreters are bound to provide truthful translations.

318. Record in High Court

  • High Court Rules:

    • High Courts can prescribe how evidence and accused examinations are recorded.

  • Compliance:

    • Evidence must be recorded according to these rules. 


Section 319: When Attendance of Witness May Be Dispensed With and Commission Issued

Subsection (1)

  • Power of Court/Magistrate:
    A Court or Magistrate may dispense with the attendance of a witness if it is deemed necessary for the ends of justice and if procuring the witness would cause undue delay, expense, or inconvenience.

  • Reason for Dispensing Attendance:
    The attendance of a witness can be dispensed if it causes unreasonable delay or expense in the case. This decision is based on the circumstances surrounding the case.

  • Special Clause for High-Level Officials:
    If the witness is a high-ranking official such as the President of India, Vice-President, Governor, or Administrator of a Union Territory, the Court must issue a commission to examine the witness.

Subsection (2)

  • Expense of Examination:
    When the Court issues a commission for the examination of a witness for the prosecution, it may direct the prosecution to pay an amount considered reasonable to cover the expenses of the accused, including the advocate’s fees.

Section 320: Commission to Whom to Be Issued

Subsection (1)

  • Domestic Witnesses:
    If the witness is located within the territory where the Sanhita applies, the commission is directed to the Chief Judicial Magistrate in the area where the witness resides.

Subsection (2)

  • Witnesses in States or Areas Outside the Sanhita's Jurisdiction:
    If the witness is in an area outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Sanhita, the commission will be directed to a specified Court or officer as notified by the Central Government.

Subsection (3)

  • Foreign Witnesses:
    If the witness is located outside India, and the Central Government has made arrangements with that foreign government, the commission is issued according to the prescribed method, directed to the appropriate authorities for transmission and execution.

Section 321: Execution of Commissions

Subsection (1)

  • Execution of Commission:
    Upon receiving the commission, the Chief Judicial Magistrate (or a designated Magistrate) shall summon the witness to examine them, or alternatively, travel to the witness’s location to take down their evidence in the same manner as in warrant-cases.

Section 322: Parties May Examine Witnesses

Subsection (1)

  • Interrogatories:
    The parties to a case may submit written interrogatories (questions) to the Court, which the Court or officer executing the commission may use to examine the witness.

Subsection (2)

  • Right to Cross-Examine:
    The parties have the right to appear before the Magistrate, Court, or officer executing the commission, to cross-examine or re-examine the witness.

Section 323: Return of Commission

Subsection (1)

  • Return of Commission:
    After the commission is executed, the commission, along with the deposition of the witness, must be returned to the issuing Court or Magistrate.

  • Inspection and Use of Documents:
    The commission, return, and deposition must be available for inspection by the parties and can be read in evidence, forming part of the official record.

Subsection (2)

  • Use in Subsequent Proceedings:
    If the deposition meets the requirements of Section 27 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, it may also be admitted as evidence in future stages of the case.

Section 324: Adjournment of Proceeding

Subsection (1)

  • Adjournment for Execution of Commission:
    The inquiry, trial, or proceeding may be adjourned for a reasonable time to allow the execution and return of the commission.

Section 325: Execution of Foreign Commissions

Subsection (1)

  • Foreign Commission Execution:
    Provisions from Section 321, Section 322, and Section 323 regarding commission execution and return apply to commissions issued by foreign Courts or authorities, as specified by the Central Government.

Subsection (2)

  • Applicable Courts and Authorities:
    This section applies to foreign courts, judges, or magistrates specified by the Central Government who have jurisdiction over criminal matters and can issue commissions.

Section 326: Deposition of Medical Witness

Subsection (1)

  • Medical Deposition:
    The deposition of a medical officer, such as a civil surgeon, can be given in evidence even if the officer is not physically present in Court, provided it has been attested by a Magistrate or taken on commission.

Subsection (2)

  • Summoning Medical Witness:
    The Court may, if necessary, summon and examine the medical officer to clarify the content of their deposition.

Section 327: Identification Report of Magistrate

Subsection (1)

  • Use of Identification Report:
    An identification report signed by an Executive Magistrate can be used in evidence, even if the Magistrate is not called to testify.

  • Exceptions:
    If the report includes statements governed by specific sections (19, 26, 27, 158, 160) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, it cannot be used unless the requirements of those sections are met.

Subsection (2)

  • Summoning Magistrate for Clarification:
    The Court may summon the Magistrate who prepared the report if it considers it necessary to clarify the subject matter of the report.

Section 328: Evidence of Officers of Mint

Subsection (1)

  • Mint and Printing Press Reports:
    Documents from officers in charge of mints, note printing presses, security printing presses, and forensic labs can be used as evidence even if the officer is not called to testify in person.

Subsection (2)

  • Summoning Officer for Clarification:
    The Court may summon and examine the officer responsible for preparing such reports if it deems necessary.

Subsection (3)

  • Restrictions on Officer Testimony:
    Officers cannot disclose unpublished official records or the details of specific tests they used unless authorized by their superiors.

Section 329: Reports of Certain Government Scientific Experts

Subsection (1)

  • Use of Scientific Expert Reports:
    Reports prepared by government scientific experts (e.g., chemical examiners, forensic experts) can be used as evidence, even if the expert is not called to testify.

Subsection (2)

  • Summoning Expert for Clarification:
    The Court may summon the scientific expert if it believes clarification is needed.

Subsection (3)

  • Substitute Testimony:
    If the expert cannot attend, they may depute a responsible officer to attend the Court and testify on their behalf.

Subsection (4)

  • List of Applicable Experts:
    The section applies to a range of government scientific experts, such as chemical examiners, forensic experts, and others as notified by the government.

Section 330: No Formal Proof of Certain Documents

Subsection (1)

  • Admitting Documents Without Proof:
    When a document is filed in Court, the party submitting the document must list it and admit or deny its authenticity within 30 days.

  • Relaxation of Time Limit:
    The Court may extend this time limit with a written reason.

Subsection (2)

  • Expert Testimony:
    An expert will only be called to testify if their report is contested by one of the parties.

Subsection (3)

  • Documents Without Signature Proof:
    If the authenticity of a document is not disputed, it may be admitted in evidence without the need to prove the signature, although the Court may still request signature verification.

Section 331: Affidavit in Proof of Conduct of Public Servants

Subsection (1)

  • Affidavit in Public Servant Conduct:
    If allegations regarding public servants are made, the applicant may provide an affidavit as evidence. The Court may allow evidence of such facts to be given through an affidavit.

Section 332: Evidence of Formal Character on Affidavit

Subsection (1)

  • Formal Evidence via Affidavit:
    A person whose evidence is formal in nature may submit an affidavit that may be read in Court as evidence.

Subsection (2)

  • Summoning of Affiant:
    The Court may summon the person who submitted the affidavit to clarify or testify regarding the content of the affidavit.

Section 333: Authorities Before Whom Affidavits May Be Sworn

Subsection (1)

  • Affidavit Oath Authorities:
    Affidavits can be sworn before Judges, Magistrates, or Notaries, as well as specific officers designated by law.

Subsection (2)

  • Content of Affidavit:
    The affidavit must state facts that the deponent knows personally or has reason to believe to be true. If the latter, the grounds for such belief must be clearly stated.

Subsection (3)

  • Court’s Authority Over Affidavits:
    The Court

2/2
ChatGPT said:

can remove scandalous or irrelevant content from affidavits.

Section 334: Previous Conviction or Acquittal How Proved

Subsection (1)

  • Proof of Previous Convictions/Acquittals:
    Proof can be provided through certified copies of judgments, jail records, or commitment warrants, along with evidence linking the accused to the prior case.

Section 335: Record of Evidence in Absence of Accused

Subsection (1)

  • Recording Evidence When Accused Is Absent:
    If the accused is absconding, their evidence can be recorded in their absence, provided certain conditions are met, such as the deponent being dead, untraceable, or their presence causing unreasonable delay.

Subsection (2)

  • Inquiry for Unknown Offenders:
    In cases where the offender is unknown, a Magistrate can record evidence, which can later be used against any accused person if specific conditions are met.

Section 336: Evidence of Public Servants, Experts, Police Officers in Certain Cases

Subsection (1)

  • Using Reports from Absent Officers:
    If a public servant, expert, or police officer is unavailable due to retirement, transfer, or death, their successor may testify about the document or report.

Subsection (2)

  • Conditions for Summoning Officers:
    Officers are only summoned if their reports are disputed by the parties involved.

Subsection (3)

  • Remote Testimony via Video:
    The successor officer's testimony may be allowed via audio-video means if the Court deems it appropriate.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Organs of Government: Relationship Between the Executive

  AUTHOR: SHIVANSHU KATARE Introduction to the Organs of Government In a modern democratic state, the government is typically divided into three branches or organs : The Legislature : Responsible for making laws. The Executive : Responsible for implementing laws and managing day-to-day administration. The Judiciary : Interprets laws and ensures justice. Each organ has distinct powers, but they function interdependently. The relationship between the executive and the other organs is crucial for maintaining the proper functioning of the government. Here, the focus is on the relationship between the executive and the legislature , which is often complex and varies across different political systems. 1. The Role and Structure of the Executive The Executive is primarily responsible for the implementation of laws and administration of government policies. It can be divided into two categories: Political Executive : Comprising the Head of State (e.g., the President in India) and the Hea...
Post a Comment
Read more

Judicial Accountability Bill, 2013

  AUTHOR: SHIVANSHU KATARE The Judicial Accountability Bill, 2013 was introduced in the Indian Parliament to address the issue of judicial accountability in the country. The bill aimed to ensure that judges, especially of higher courts, are held accountable for their conduct and decisions, while simultaneously safeguarding the independence of the judiciary. This bill was a step towards bringing transparency, fairness, and accountability in the judicial system, as it is essential for maintaining public trust in the judicial process. Context and Background The bill was introduced in response to several concerns regarding judicial accountability, the lack of transparency in the appointment and conduct of judges, and the increasing demands for judicial reforms. While the Indian judiciary is an independent body, there has been criticism about its lack of accountability mechanisms, particularly in cases involving judicial misconduct or inefficiency. The Judicial Accountability Bill, 2...
Post a Comment
Read more

Theories of law and sociology

 Theories of law and sociology provide different lenses to understand the relationship between law, society, and individuals. Law is often seen not just as a set of rules but as a reflection of societal norms, power structures, and historical context. Sociology of law explores how law functions within a society and how it shapes and is shaped by social relationships, structures, and institutions. Below is a detailed examination of key theories within these two fields: 1. Natural Law Theory Natural Law Theory is one of the oldest and most influential theories about law, originating from ancient Greece and Rome. It suggests that law is not just a human invention but is rooted in a higher, universal moral order. Natural law theorists argue that certain principles of justice and morality are inherent in nature, discoverable through human reason, and should be reflected in human-made laws. Key Figures : Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, John Locke. Core Ideas : Laws should be based on moral va...
Post a Comment
Read more