Dear friends,
Having seen the overwhelming response from the students across the country, PALSAR wants to post ideally answers to some of the important questions asked in Civil Judge exam. We will post one question every day in the WEBSITE.
THANK YOU,
PALSAR
1.What is the mode of proof of WILL?
A: Will is a compulsorily attestable document as per S.63 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925. Registration is optional. The law relating to proving the contents of the WILL is dealt under S.68 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872. As per S.68 of Evidence Act, the court to read a WILL as a part of the evidence, one of the attesstor shall be examined as witness. However, if such attesting witness is dead or can’t be subject to the process of the court or not capable of giving evidence, WILL can be proved in any of the below mentioned ways: They are dealt under S.69 to 71. The aid of S.69 to 71 can be taken only upon exhausting the rule laid down u/s.68.
S.69 says if the attesting witness is not available, the attestation of one attesting witness can be proved by other evidence in his hand writing.
S.71 says If the attesting witness denies or doesn’t recollect the execution of the document; its execution may be proved by other evidence (As per S.67 Evidence Act).
S.70: If a party to an attested document has admitted the execution of the document.
2. Write a note on Expert Opinion?
Ans: It is dealt under S.45 & 46. A case can be proved with the aid of expert opinion as it is declared as relevant fact under S.45 of the Evidence Act. The opinion of a person who is an expert in any of the following subjects is a relevant fact. The subjects are like this: Opinion as to: a) Foreign law b) Science c) Art d) Identity of handwriting or finger impression. Expert opinion shall be supported by reasons. Expert opinion doesn’t bind the court, thus it is not a conclusive in nature. The expert opinion shall be received like any other evidence and it is only an advisory opinion.
3.What are essentials of Dying Declaration and mode of recording it?
Meaning of Dying Declaration: It is a relevant fact in view of S.32 (1) of the Evidence Act 1872. Dying Declaration is a statement made by a person at the time or before the time of his death as to cause of his death or circumstances relating to cause of his death. As the person who made such Dying declaration is no longer available, the person in whose presence such statement was made can testify the facts about the death of the deceased even though he didn’t perceive by his own senses. Thus Dying Declaration is one of the exceptions to the Hearsay rule of evidence.
Evidentiary Value of D.D: It’s a substantive piece of evidence. Once the court is satisfied that the D.D was true, voluntary and not influenced by any extraneous consideration, and feels convinced about the trustworthiness of the statement which may inspire confidence it can base its conviction without any corroboration. If the person didn’t die and he is alive his statement can be used for contradiction U/S.145 or U/S 157 of the IEA.
Mode of recording: The mode of recording D.D is spelled out under R.33 of Criminal rules of practice.
- D.D may be oral or written. It can be recorded by any person including a police officer depending upon the urgency. If time permits it is always desirable to get the services of the Magistrate to record D.D as it has its own value. If it is in the hospital the certificate of the medical officer about the mental condition is necessary.
- D.D must be of a person who is competent to testify as a witness, if alive.
- There is no particular method of recording a D.D. It is desirable to record it in a question and answer and the answers be written in the words of the person making the declaration. It must be complete.
- The statement must be read over and the signature or thumb impression has to be obtained .The time of recording shall be noted.
- The court is obliged to rule out the possibility of the statement being the result of tutoring, prompting or vindictive or a product of the imagination.
3.Write a note on Character evidence?
Ans: The general rule is Character evidence is irrelevant either in civil or criminal cases except under certain situations. They are expressly dealt under S. 51 to 54 of Evidence Act,1872.
Civil Cases (S.51 & 54): It is irrelevant except in two conditions. They are: a) Character itself is in issue, b) If it mitigates affects the amount of damages to be awarded.
Criminal Cases (S.52 & 53): Evidence of good character is relevant. Evidence of bad character is not relevant except under two conditions: a) When it is itself a fact in issue b) To rebut the evidence of good character.
4.What is identification parade?
Ans: Identification Parade: Facts establishing the identity of a person is a relevant fact u/s 9 of IEA. When the accused person is arrested on the basis of physical features given by the eye witness, police arranges the test of identification parade. The object of conducting Identification parade is to test the truthfulness of the witness and his capability to identify an unknown person whom the witness seen only once. The mode and manner of conducting test identification parade is spelled out under Rule.34 of A.P.Criminal rules of Practice.
- Identification parade is conducted in the presence of judicial Magistrate and the police have to leave the scene to ensure the free and fair conducting of Identification Parade,
- Suspected person will be placed among the other persons who have same physical characters of the accused as far as possible,
- Then the Magistrate calls the witness to identify the accused person to whom he had seen while committing the offense,
- If the eye witness identifies the accused and picks up the person to whom he had seen while committing the offense, the Magistrate records to that effect and he completes the proceedings. Later witness will be called by court at the time of trial to identify the accused person.
Evidentary value: It is not a substantive piece of evidence. It has only corroborative and contradictory value.
5.Point out difference between admissions and confessions.
| Admission | Confession |
| It is defined in S.17 of IEA. Admission is acknowledgment of liability. | Confession is not defined in the Act. It is an admission of Criminal liability. |
| |
| It is not conclusive proof | Judicial confession is a conclusive proof |
| |
| All admissions are not confessions | All confessions are admissions |
| It is made both in criminal and | They are made only in criminal cases |
| civil cases | |
| They can be made on behalf of | It must be made by the accused |
| another | himself. |
| Admission can be made by person against | Confession can be made by accused only |
| whom it must be proved or by his agent. | |
| |
5.Write note Resgestae?
Resgestae: Facts even though they are not in issue but if they are so connected as to form part of the same transaction they are relevant whether they occur at the same time and place or at different times and places. Transaction means an unbroken event. Example:- A is accused of the murder of B by beating him whatever was said or done by A or B or the by standers at the beating, or so shortly before or after it as to form part of the same transaction is a relevant fact.
6. What is the mode of Proving a document?
Mere filing of original document would not enable the court to read the contents there in the document unless any one of the following person as listed under S.67 come as witness. They are: 1) By calling a person who signed or wrote the document (2) By calling a person in whose presence the document was signed or written (3) By calling a handwriting expert (4) By calling a handwriting expert (5) By circumstantial evidence (6) By calling a person acquainted with the hand writing of the executant.
The above rule spelled out u/S.67 doesn‘t apply in case of public documents. The Public Documents are admitted in evidence as exception to the hearsay rule as the facts contained in them are made by the authorized or competent agents of state in discharge of their public duties.
