LL.B.

II TERM
Paper : LB - 201 - Law of Evidence
Prescribed Legislation :
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Prescribed Books:
1. Vepa P. Sarathi, Law of Evidence (6th ed., 2006)
2. M. Monir, Law of Evidence (14th ed., 2006)
I.

GENERAL ISSUES RELATING TO LAW OF EVIDENCE (6 periods)

(a) (i) Re-enactment of past events for deducing blameworthiness or entitlements
of the parties is the core enquiry of Evidence Law. Similarities between the
historians, authors, media persons and lawyers in their re-enactment of
past event enterprise.
(ii) Why rules of evidence have different significance under the Adversarial
System and Inquisitorial System of Justice?
(b) History of statutory Evidence Law in India Pre and post Indian Evidence Act,
1872 realities Role of Judiciary, particularly the appellate judiciary in updating the Evidence Law rules by judicial creativity.
(c) Understanding the concepts such as : Facts, Facts in issue, Relevant Fact,
Evidence-Oral and Documentary, Proved, Disproved and Not Proved.
(d) Relationship between law of Evidence and substantive laws (Criminal and
Civil laws) and procedural laws (Code of Criminal Procedure and Civil
Procedure Code).

II.

RELEVANCY AND ADMISSIBILITY OF FACTS (14 periods)

(a) (i) Logically relevant facts sections 5-9, 11
(ii) Special class of relevant facts relating to Conspiracy section 10
(b) Stated relevant facts
(i) Admissions - sections 17-23
(ii) Confessions - sections 24-30
(iii) Dying Declarations - section 32(1)
(c) Opinion of Third Person when relevant - sections 45-51

ii
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.

State of Maharashtra v. Prafulla B. Desai (Dr.) (2003) 4 SCC 601

R. M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1973 SC 157
Mirza Akbar v. Emperor, AIR 1940 PC 176
Badri Rai v. State of Bihar, AIR 1958 SC 953
Mohd. Khalid v. State of W.B. (2002) 7 SCC 334
Jayantibhai Bhenkerbhai v. State of Gujarat (2002) 8 SCC 165
Bishwanath Prasad v. Dwarka Prasad, AIR 1974 SC 117
Central Bureau of Investigation v. V.C. Shukla, AIR 1998 SC 1406
Veera Ibrahim v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1976 SC 1167
Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar, AIR 1966 SC 119
Pulukuri Kottaya v. Emperor, AIR 1947 PC 67
Bodhraj v. State of J. & K. (2002) 8 SCC 45
Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay, AIR 1958 SC 22
Sudhakar v. State of Maharashtra (2000) 6 SCC 671
Patel Hiralal Joitaram v. State of Gujrat (2002) 1 SCC 22
Laxman v. State of Maharashtra (2002) 6 SCC 710
Ram Narain v. State of U.P., AIR 1973 SC 2200 : (1973) 2 SCC 86

III.

1
10
17
23
26
39
46
49
59
64
70
76
86
95
101
108
111

ON PROOF ( 7 periods)
(a) (i) Facts which need not be proved sections 56-58
(ii) Facts which the parties are prohibited from proving Doctrine of Estoppel
sections 115-117
(iii) Privileged communications sections 122-129
(b) (i) Oral and documentary evidence sections 59-78
(ii) Exclusion of oral by documentary evidence sections 91-92

18.
19.
20.
21.
22.

R. S. Maddanappa v. Chandramma (1965) 3 SCR 283

Madhuri Patel v. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development,
AIR 1995 SC 94
Sanatan Gauda v. Berhampur University, AIR 1990 SC 1075
M.C. Vergheese v. T.J. Ponnan, AIR 1970 SC 1876
State of U.P. v. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 865

114
120
131
136
140

IV. ACCOMPLICE EVIDENCE section 133 read with section 114 (b) ( 2 periods)
23.
24.
25.

Bhuboni Sahu v. The King, AIR 1949 PC 257

Haroon Haji Abdulla v. State of Maharastra, AIR 1975 SC 856
Ravinder Singh v. State of Haryana, AIR 1975 SC 856

158
163
169

iii
V. WITNESSES ; COMPETENCE AND EXAMINATIONS ( 3 periods)
(a) (i) Child Witness section 118
(ii) Dumb Witness section 119
(iii) Hostile Witness section 154
(b)
26.

Examination, cross-examination and re-examination- sections 137-139, 155

State of Bihar v. Laloo Prasad (2002) 9 SCC 626

VI.

176

PRESUMPTIONS (2 periods)
Sections 4, 41, 105, 111-A, 112, 113, 113-A, 113-B, 114 and 114-A

27.

Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1993 SC 2295

178

IMPORTANT NOTE:
1. The topics and cases given above are not exhaustive. The teachers teaching the course
shall be at liberty to add new topics/cases.
2. The students are required to study the legislations as amended up-to-date and consult
the latest editions of books.
3. The Question Paper shall include one compulsory question consisting of five parts out
of which four parts will be required to be attempted. The question papers set for the
examinations held during 2007-08 and 2008-09 are printed below for guidance of the
students.
4. The periods indicated against each topic are the minimum teaching hours.
*****

iv
LL.B. II Term Examinations, April-May, 2008
Note:

Answer any five questions including Question No. 1 which is compulsory.

All questions carry equal marks.

1. Attempt briefly any four of the following:

(a) Who is an expert? Is the opinion given by him relevant?
(b) Who is competent to testify? Is a dumb witness competent to testify?
(c) What is a fact. How is it different from fact in issue. Give at least two examples
of each.
(d) Law of Evidence is said to be Lex-fori. Explain.
(e) What is documentary Evidence? Is electronically recorded evidence oral,
documentary or real one. Point out the difference, if any, between Indian and English
law on the point.
2. State the provisions of law and give reasons as to the relevancy of the following facts:
(i) In a trial of conspiracy to wage war against Country X, evidence is given of facts
that funds were raised in State Y, arms and ammunition was purchased in State T and
training of arms was given in State X.
(ii) In a charge of murder by domestic help of an elderly couple, evidence is given by
prosecution that they received money sent by their son from U.S.A. on the same day.
(iii) In a trial of murder, post-mortem report reveals that the digested food indicated
that the murder must have taken placed three to four hours after lunch.
(iv) A is accused of kidnapping a child for ransom from Ghaziabad on 01.03.08. A
produces a certificate that he was admitted in P.G.I. Chandigarh from 25.02.08 to
05.03.08 for treatment of lung infection.
3. (a) Statement of a co-conspirator is admissible against the conspirators. Explain.
(b) A was a customs officer and B the agent working for importer X & Co. at the custom
House. B made some entries in his day book about the goods passing them without
paying full duty at the custom house. These entries and counterfoil of his cheque book
showing that money was paid to A are produced by prosecution in a trial of A and B for
the offence of conspiracy. Discuss relevancy of both these documents under section 10 of
Indian Evidence Act.
4. (a) Can the statement made by the one partner bind all partners in a dispute between
partnership firm and third party? Explain the relevant provisions of the Evidence Act and
give reasons.
(b) A, an alleged offender of rape, while in police remand felt pain in his chest. He was
admitted in a hospital, where a police constable was kept on the gate to keep a watch on
him. A confessed his guilt before another patient X who was also in the same room. This

v
statement was over-heard by policeman also. Prosecution wants to make this statement of
A as confession. Can they do so? Discuss.
5. There is no absolute Rule of Law or even a rule of Prudence that dying declaration unless
corroborated by other independent evidence is not fit to be acted upon and made the basis of
conviction. Discuss above statement with the support of case law.
6. (a) A child was born within 280 days of husbands death. Evidence was offered that about
the time while the child was conceived the husband was suffering from Carbuncle
(Swelling under the skin) and died of illness within 14 days. Can the plea of paternity be
negatived? Discuss.
(b) What is a privileged communication? What are its exceptions.
7. The law is not that the evidence of an accomplice deserves outright rejection if there is no
corroboration. What is required is to adopt great circumspection and care when dealing with
the evidence of an accomplice. Though there is no legal necessity to seek corroboration of
accomplices evidence, it is desirable that the court seeks reassuring circumstances to satisfy
the judicial conscience that the evidence is true. Elucidate the above statement.
8. (a) What is basis of the rule of estoppel. How is it different from promissory estoppel.
(b) X, a student got marks-sheet from CBSE, showing that he had passed in biology, physics
and chemistry with good marks. X, as a matter of fact had never opted or appeared for
biology. However, he remained silent and sought admission in 1st year of MBBS course at
Delhi Medical College. When he had to appear in his 1st professional course of MBBS,
CBSE realizing the error served a notice on him for wrong marks-sheet and subsequently
cancelled admission. X, consults you for using estoppel against CBSE. State your opinion
giving reasons.
*****
LL.B. II Term (Supplementary) Examinations, Aug.-Sept. 2008
Note: Answer any five questions including Question No. 1 which is compulsory.
All questions carry equal marks.
1. Attempt briefly any four of the following:
(a) What is the difference between relevancy and admissibility? Illustrate your answer by
giving at least one example.
(b) Explain the concept and significance of an expert evidence.
(c) Discuss oral and documentary evidence.
(d) When is a witness said to have turned hostile? Is the evidence given by such a
witness still relevant and admissible?
(e) Who is competent to testify? Is the evidence given by a child admissible?

vi
2. Discuss the provisions of law, under which the following are relevant:
(i) X is accused of receiving stolen property knowing it to be stolen. He offers to
prove that he refused to sell it below their value.
(ii) In a dispute between X and Y for inducing A to break his contract of service; X
produces the following statement of A as evidence:
I am leaving you because Y has made me a better offer.
(iii) A is being prosecuted for the murder of B. Prosecution produces poison procured
by A similar to that which has been administered to B.
(iv) X is prosecuted for rioting in Chandigarh on 20.03.2007. X produces a railway
ticket showing that on 20.03.2007 he was traveling from Mumbai to Dehradun.
3. (a) Conspiracy is based on the principle of Agency. Comment.
(b) X wrote a letter to B asking him to supply explosives for blowing up a Govt. building. B
took some time in sending it. In the meantime, X wrote another letter to B seeking
reasons about delay. However, before the second letter could reach B, X received the
explosives and used the same. In case of conspiracy, prosecution wants to produce both
these letters. Decide whether they are admissible or not?
4. (a) X and Y are the joint owners of a plot of land. A claims right of way over this plot. X
makes a statement agreeing with A, about his claim. Is this statement binding on Y? Give
reasons and relevant provisions of law.
(b) Prem was charged of committing murder of his brother Ramesh. Prosecution produces
two items against Prem:
(i) a statement made by Prem which led to the recovery of blood-stained axe, shirt and
trousers; and
(ii) a statement of Prem to the police that blood-stained clothes belonged to him and the
axe was used for the commission of murder.
Are these statements relevant as confessions or not? Give reasons.
5. (a) What is a dying declaration? Can it be accepted without corroboration?
(b) Y, a young married woman, had been speaking to her parents and other relatives and also
writing to them expressing danger to her life. She lost her life 3 months after. Are such
items dying declarations? Discuss.
6.

An accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborated in material particulars.

Critically examine the statement with the help of decided cases.

7. (a) A got divorce from B on 31.12.2007 and married C on 1.3.2008. A delivered child
X in the month of April (30.04.2008). C disputes the paternity of the child on the basis
that X was conceived during the subsistence of first marriage and therefore B is the
father. Kindly advise A about the existing law.
(b) A news in the newspaper stated that those industrialists who will open their units in
Assam will be exempted from corporate income tax for a period of 5 years. X, who

vii
wanted to set up a jute industry applied to the Director of Industries as well as to Chief
Secretary of the State and both confirmed the availability of exemption. X proceeded
with his plans. However, the State Govt. withdrew its policy of exemption. X seeks
estoppel against States withdrawal of its promise. Provide legal advice to X.
8. (a) S, a Govt. servant, commits misappropriation of funds for the purpose of marrying his
daughter. S, communicates this to his wife W. Five years later, S and W got divorced. A
year after his divorce, S is put on trial for the offence of criminal misappropriation W is
produced as a witness by prosecution against S. Can Ws testimony be accepted by
Court? Discuss.
(b) Discuss the exceptions which are admitted against privileged communications.
*****
LL.B. II Term Examinations, April-May, 2009
Note:

Attempt five questions including Question No. 1 which is compulsory.

All questions carry equal marks.

1. Attempt briefly any four of the following:

(a) What is a fact? How is it different from fact in issue? Give two illustrations of each.
(b) Who is competent to testify? Is evidence given by a child admissible?
(c) Explain the relevancy of expert evidence.
(d) What is the different between May presume and shall presume. Give examples
and relevant provisions.
(e) Discuss oral and documentary evidence.
2. State the provisions of law and give reasons as to relevancy of the following facts:
(a) In a case of homicide against X, prosecution produces a statement of Y.
I heared the cries and saw the dead body.
(b) In a case of an indecent assault upon a maid servant, the complaint she made to her
mistress indicating the offender including his name.
(c) In case of an identity of a skeleton recovered from a pond, the production of super
imposed photograph of deceased over the skeleton by the prosecution.
3. (a) Rule in selection 10 of Indian Evidence Act confines the principle of agency in criminal
matters to the acts of the co-conspirator. Comment.
(b) In a case of kidnapping for ransom against A, B and C, the prosecution produces (i) a
letter written by A to B and C about the day, date, time and place where they should meet
to carry out the plan and (ii) the ransom money which was obtained and recovered by
police after the arrest of C (one of the accused) from his possession.
Decide the relevancy and admissibility of the above evidence.

viii
4. (a) A sues B for loan of Rs. 5,000 which B denies. However, B makes a statement before X
that he has taken loan from A, though X was not present when transaction took place
between A and B.
Is the statement of B to X relevant? State the relevant provision and rule of evidence.
(b) In a case involving robbery and murder, X ,one of the accused person, told: I am
wearing the pant which I washed after the commission of crime while other accused Y
said: I can show you the place where the looted property has been kept. The property
was recovered at his instance from the place of hiding. Can statements made by X and Y
be said to be confessions (within the rules of evidence)?
5. (a) There is no absolute rule of law that dying declaration can be the sole basis of conviction
unless corroborated. Comment.
(b) L, a lady shareholder in a property, was called by her relatives to joint property. On her
arrival, kerosene was poured on her and she was set ablaze. L died 5 days later. A
statement in the nature of complaint was recorded by police officer in the hospital where
she breathed last.
6. (a) The presumption of legitimacy under Indian Evidence Act can be displaced by a strong
preponderance of evidence and not by mere balance of probabilities. Discuss in the light
of decided cases.
(b) Pending the results of his qualifying exam., X appeared for LL.B Entrance Test of Delhi
University and obtained 10th rank in the merit list. He was provisionally admitted to
graduate course in law. In the meantime, his result of qualifying exam. was declared and
he, as per the marks card issued, secured 60% marks. He appeared in 1st and 2nd Term of
law and was promoted to 3rd Term. The University issued a notice to Mr. X stating that it
was by error that he was shown getting 60% marks. In fact, he had obtained only 45%
marks, hence was not qualified to be a student of graduate course in law. University
proceeds to cancel his admission. Can the University do so? Give reasons.
7. An accomplice is unworthy of credit unless he is corroborated in material particulars.
Critically analyse the above statement.
8. (a) X communicated to his wife Y the whole episode as to how he misappropriated the
money from the office and obtained property. Five years later, X and Y separated through
a decree of divorce. Y married another person M. Two years later, in a case of possession
of assets disproportionate to the income, X was prosecuted. Can the divorced wife of X
(namely Y) be produced as witness against X.
(b) A communication between a lawyer and his client is privileged subject to certain
conditions. Explain.
*****

ix
LL.B. II Term (Supplementary) Examinations, July-August, 2009
Note:

Attempt five questions including Question No. 1 which is compulsory.

All questions carry equal marks.

1. Attempt briefly any four of the following:

(a) Write precautions which must be taken for tape-recorded conversation before
admitting it in evidence.
(b) Distinguish between the terms Proved, Disproved, Not Proved.
(c) Reproduce the law relating to hostile witness.
(d) What is real or material evidence? Answer in the light of the provisions of the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872.
(e) Are relevancy and admissibility synonymous terms? Explain.
2. Under which provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, are the following relevant:
(a) The question is whether A murdered B. Marks on the ground, produced by a struggle
at or near the place where the murder was committed.
(b) The question is whether A was ravished. The facts that, shortly after the alleged rape,
she made a complaint relating to the crime, the circumstances under which and the terms
in which the complaint was made.
(c) A is tried for riot and is proved to have marched at the head of the mob, the cries of
the mob.
(d) The question is whether A committed a crime. The circumstances are such that the
crime must have been committed either by A, B, C or D, every fact which shows that the
crime could have been committed by no one else and that it was not committed by either
B, C or D.
3. X supplied to Y explosives sufficient to blow up a bridge. Y, together with Z, utilized the
explosive for the purpose of blowing up the bridge. But the attempt was unsuccessful. Next,
following day, Y sent a letter to X describing the unsuccessful attempt to blow up the bridge
and further asked him to supply another consignment of explosives. The said letter was
intercepted by the police, which consequently arrested all three of them. Later in the case of
conspiracy to blow up the said bridge, the prosecution wants to use the letter of Y as against
Z and X. Will it succeed? Under which change of circumstances would the letter become
admissible? Answer in the backdrop of relevant provisions of law and the decided case on the
issue.
4. (a) Mr. Justice Sir John Beaumont, while hearing an appeal in Privy Council way back in
1947, wrote, Section 27 (of the Evidence Act) is not artistically worded; provides an
exception to the prohibitions imposed by preceding sections and enables certain
statements made by a person in police custody to be proved. Discuss this proposition in
the context of the preceding provisions of the Evidence Act.

x
(b) A Sub-Inspector of police of Bombay took an accused into custody on charges of theft.
Upon interrogation, the accused made the following statement, which was recorded by
the Sub-Inspector, I will tell the place of deposit of the three chemical drums which I
stole from Haji Bunder on 1st Aug. The accused then led the police-officer to a
Musafirkhana in Crawford market and pointed the three drums lying there. How much of
the statement of the accused can be used in evidence? What inferences the court would
draw from the statement and the consequent recovery?
5. (a) A seriously injured victim on reaching the hospital tells the doctor on duty that X has
stabbed me because . And before completing the sentence collapses and dies.
Discuss the relevancy and veracity of the above dying declaration in the trial of X for
murder.
(b) According to Supreme Court of India, dying declaration can be the sole basis of
conviction subject to certain precautions. What are these precautions?
6. How have the courts, through judicial pronouncements, reconciled the conflicting provisions
relating to Accomplice testimony. Discuss these decisions with special reference to
confession by a co-accused.
7. (a) A intentionally and falsely leads B to believe that certain lands belong to A, and thereby
induces B to buy and pay for it. The lands afterwards become the property of A and A
seeks to set aside the sale on the ground that, at the time of the sale, he had no title. Can
A succeed? Decide in the backdrop of relevant law.
(b) A, a client says to B an attorney: I wish to obtain possession of property by the use of a
forged deed on which I request you to sue. Is this communication protected from
disclosure? Give reasons to your answer.
8. (a) Can the English law permitting blood test for determining paternity for legitimacy of
child be applied in India? Give a reasoned answer.
(b) In law relating to legitimacy of child, the Supreme Court has observed that: access
and non-access mean the existence or non-existence of opportunities for sexual
intercourse; it does not mean actual co-habitation. Explain the observation.

xi
LL.B. II Term Examinations, May-June, 2010
1.

2.

3.

4.

Answer briefly any four of the following :(a)

All that is relevant may not be admissible but all that is admissible has to be
relevant. Elaborate the statement. Mention exceptions to it, if any.
(b)
Value and proof of circumstantial evidence.
(c)
Law relating to dumb witness.
(d)
Difference between a narrative statement and a complaint.
(e)
Different between confessions ad admissions.
Under which provision (specific part) of Indian Evidence 1872, are the following
relevant?
(a)
The question is whether A owes B Rs. 10,000. The facts that A asked C to lend
him money and that D said to C in As presence and hearing I advise you not
to trust A, for he owes B, Rs. 10,000. and that A went away without making any
answer.
(b)
The question is whether A was robbed. The fact that soon after the alleged
robbery, he made a complaint relating to the offence, the circumstances under
which and the terms in which the complaint was made.
(c)
A, an accused of theft, is seen to give the stolen property to B, who is seen to
give it to As wife. B says as he delivers it A says you are to hide this.
Statement of B.
(d)
The question is, whether a horse sold by A to B is sound.
A says to B Go and ask C. C knows all about it. Statement of C.
(a)
What are the difference in English and Indian law of Evidence pertaining to
conspiracy ?
(b)
Three revolutionaries A, B and C, shoot a S.H.O. of a police station in Gaya in
the State of Jharkhand. While fleeing from the scence one of them, C on seeing a
fellow traveler D, shouted to him loudly, We have shot the S.H.O. of this
police station; now get pamphlets published to this effect and distribute them in
public. Later when all four of them are being tried for conspiracy to overthrow
Constitutional Government through violent means, the prosecution relies on the
above statement of C as a credible piece of evidence. Can it be permitted to do
that ? Support your answer with the aid of the legal provision and the decided
cases on it.
(a)
The Supreme Court in Aghnoo Negesia Vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1966 SC, 119
has observed Section 27 is in the form of a proviso, and partially lifts the ban
imposed by Sections 24, 25, 26.

xii

(b)

5.

6.

7.

8.

Elaborate the observation by discussing the provisions mentioned therein

threadbare.
A, an accused of murder; after arrest confessed to police in these words : I will
produce a knife concealed in the roof of my house, with which I stabbed A.
How much of the above statement is admissible in evidence if the knife was
finally recovered at his instance.

In Ram Nath Madhoprasad Vs. State of M.P. (AIR 1953 SC 420). The Supreme Court
made the following observation : It is settled law that it is not safe to convict an accused
person merely on the evidence furnished by a dying declaration without further
corroboration because such a statement is not made on oath and is not subject to crossexamination and . .
By subsequent decisions has the court over-ruled its above ruling ?
If so, state the correct proposition of law together with precautions that courts should take
in dealing with dying declarations.
Honble Mr. Justice Sir John Beaumont in Bhuboni Sahu Vs. The King, AIR 1949 PC
257; wrote, Reading these two enactments together, the courts in India have held that
whilst it is not illegal to act upon the uncorroborated evidence of an accomplice it is a
rule of prudence so universally followed as to amount almost to a rule of law that it is
unsafe to act upon the evidence of an accomplice unless it is corroborated in material
respects so as to implicate the accused; and .
Critically analyse the above statement with special reference to the two enactments
mentioned above and the decided cases pertaining to accomplice testimony.
(a)
Explain doctrine of Estoppel. Can there be estoppels against statute.
(b)
What are exceptions to the privileged communication between Husband and
Wife ?
(c)
A, a client says to B, an attorney I have committed forgery, and I wish you to
defend me.
Is this statement protected from disclosure ?
(a)
Explain the three different type of presumptions.
(b)
The Supreme Court in a decision has opined thus, This section is based on the
well know maxim pater est quem nuptiae demostrant (he is the father whom the marriage
indicates) .. The law presumes both that a marriage ceremony is valid
and that every person is legitimate. Explain the provision in question with special
reference to its brush with blood test, controversy.
*****

xiii

LL.B. II Term (Supplementary) Examinations, July-August, 2011

Note:

Answer any five questions including Question No. 1 which is compulsory.

All questions carry equal marks.

1. Attempt briefly any four of the following:

(a) What is factum probandum and how is it proved. Give illustrations.
(b) Documentary and oral evidence.
(c) Competency of and admissibility of a child witness.
(d) Significance of cross-examination and effects of cross-examining a witness without
examination in chief.
(e) Who is an expert? What are the subjects on which an expert is competent to testify.
2. Are the following relevant? State the relevant provisions of law and cases.
(a) A is being prosecuted for murder of Z by beating. Prosecution produces statement of
two by-standers X and Y, who heard A, immediately after beating Z to death saying
NOW I CAM LIVE PEACEFULL.
(b) In a charge of A killing her husband B, prosecution procedures evidence of extramarital relationship between A and X (her paramour).
(c) In a case of attempted rape on M, a maid servant by P the evidence is produced that
shortly after the commission of act M made a complaint to the Q (the wife of P) her
mistress stating the name of the offender.
(d) Ina charge of death against A by burning of his wife X, prosecution produces the
photograph prepared by superimposing a skull of the deceased collected from crime
scene.
(e) In case of death by shooting, evidence is produced of A and B that they saw X
shooting at C at a distance of 35 feet. While medical report says that C has been shot
dead at point black range.
3.
(a) Statement of one conspirator is accepted against co-conspirator on the basis of
mutual trust as in case of agency. Discuss
(b) In an act of earning quick money X and Y agreed to kidnap children from good
public schools whose parents are capable of giving ransom. X wrote a letter to Y
asking him to be present on 14.11.2010 (Childrens Day) at a Public School in Noida
at 12.00 noon. X waited for Y on the spot while waiting gave messages to Y through
his mobile phone, asking to get some chloroform along with him to facilitate the
execution of work. Police working on a tip arrested Y before he could reach X, Y
agrees to the plan chalked out by them and the whole purpose of it.
In a case of prosecution for exempt to kidnapping for ransom, following evidence
is produced:

xiv
(a) Letter written by X to Y
(b) Mobile phone messages of X to Y and
(c) Statement of Y accepting the plan
4.

5.

(a) In a partnership from X the managing partner incurred ` 30,000 as liabilities during
usual course of business. Y one of the creditors sued the firm, which was admitted by
X. does admission of X bind rest of the partners too. Discuss in the light of relevant
provisions of Law and decided cases.
(b) In a charge of Murder Mr. X while in police custody made a statement accepting
that he killed A and has buried the dead body in the courtyard of his house. Police
working of this statement exhumed the selection of A from the marked place.
Discuss relevancy and the extent of admissibility of such statement made by X while
in police custody.
(a) It can not be laid down an absolute rule of law that dying declaration can not forum
the sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated. Discuss in the light of decided
cases.
(b) Bimla who was married in 2006 was subjected to torture by her in-laws. She has been
reporting this to her relatives and parents. In her letter written two months before
Diwali, she wrote to her father to take her away as she feels danger to her life. Bimla
died 1 months after this statement. In the case of dowry death prosecution produces
this letter as dying declaration of Bimla to support their case. Can they do so even
if the letter is six weeks old?

6.

7.

8.

The Courts in India have held that whilst it is not illegal to Act on uncorroborated
evidence of accomplice, it is a rule of prudence so university followed as to amount
almost to rule of law that it is unsafe to Act on the evidence of an accomplice unless
it is corroborated in material respects so as to implicate the accused Explain
(a) M and F were married in Dec. 2008. They divorced in March 2009. F(lady) remarried
with X in May 2009 and in October 2009 gave birth to a baby. X disputes the
paternity of newly born baby. Can he do so? State law on the point. Can the test of
DNA work as rebuttle for legitimacy of new born child.
(b) A and B who were living together when B, committed embezzlement of funds in his
office to please his wife A on the first marriage anniversary. B communicated all this
to A on the day of 1st anniversary one year after they separated through the degree of
divorce. A remarried C a colleague of B in his office. Through a complaint of C. B is
being prosecuted for embezzlement. C along with prosecution produces A (ex-wife
B) as evidence. Is this permissible)? Give reasons.
(a) In order to hold a person bound by estoppels under section 115 of Indian Evidence
Act it is necessary to prove that there was a representation that certain state of thing

xv
is true and the person to whom such representation is made acted on the belief of it.
Discuss.
(b) A managed to get Licence of a pilot on the basis of a false certificate. It took 4 long
years for the authorities to get it detected and very true facts. They cancelled the
licence of the said pilot who takes the plea that he has been flying without any
problem. Hence seek estoppels against authorities. Decide case on the basis of
existing Law and Judgments of Courts in India.