Start learning 50% faster. Sign in now
Get Started with ixamBee
Start learning 50% faster. Sign in nowThe Supreme Court of India in the case of Kalyan Kumar Gogoi v. Ashutosh Agnihotri and Anr. (2011) took a note of the fact as to why hearsay evidence is not considered as relevant evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The fundamentals of the evidence law state that the hearsay evidence is inadmissible in the court of law on grounds that the same is inaccurate and vague by its very nature. The case of Roop Kumar v. Mohan Thedani (2003) revolves around the scope and ambit of Sections 91, and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 that deals with ldquo;How much of information received from accused may be provedrdquo; is nothing but a proviso to Section 25 and 26 of the Act, as has been observed by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Bodh Raj @ Bodha And Ors v. State Of Jammu And Kashmir (2002). The issue before the Apex Court in this present case has been whether the weapon used to assault that has been discovered on the reliance of the information provided by the accused in custody, be sufficient enough to fasten the guilt of the accused or not. The case of Anvar P.V v. P.K.Basheer Ors (2014) holds immense importance in todayrsquo;s technology-driven world as the Supreme Court in this noteworthy case decided on the admissibility of electronic evidence in a court of the law taking into account Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. By interpreting the application of provisions 63, 65, and 65B of the Act of 1872, the Apex Court, in this case, overruled its earlier decision made in the case of State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu (2005), commonly known as the Parliament Attack case. The three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Chief Justice R M Lodha, and Justices Kurian Joseph and Rohinton Fali Nariman by observing that an electronic record as a shred of secondary evidence shall not be admissible before the Court as evidence unless the requisites laid down by Section 65B are abided by.
Select the segment which has a grammatical error in the given sentence.
Sunita put her hand into her pocket and was astonished when she found t...
They persisted(A)/ on their going(B)/ in spite of rain.(C)
Read the given sentence to find out whether there will be error in any of the two parts, mark the parts in which there will be error as answer from the ...
A unique feature of a mobile phone(A)/ is that it enables seamless telephone calls even(B)/ when the user are moving around wide areas.(C)/ No error(D)
The young Indian scientists are breaking new grounds .
In each of the questions, a sentence has been divided into four parts, one of which may contain an error. Identify that fragment and mark it as your an...
Directions : In the question given below, a sentence is given, divided into parts. One of the parts may contain an error. Identify the part that contai...
In the question below, a sentence is given, divided into five parts (A) , (B) , (C) , (D) and (E) . One of the parts is grammatically incorrect or has ...
The following sentence has been split into four segments. Identify the segment that contains a grammatical error
Mohan told to / Sagar that he / ...