Evidence Act And Admissibility Rules In Criminal Proceedings
1. Overview: Evidence in Criminal Proceedings
Definition
Evidence refers to information presented to prove or disprove a fact in a court of law. In criminal trials, evidence is crucial because it determines guilt or innocence beyond a reasonable doubt.
Sources and Forms of Evidence
Oral Evidence – Statements of witnesses (Section 60 of Indian Evidence Act).
Documentary Evidence – Written documents, electronic records (Sections 61-90).
Electronic/Digital Evidence – Emails, WhatsApp chats, CCTV recordings (Amended IT Act and Evidence Act Section 65A).
Real/Physical Evidence – Weapons, fingerprints, DNA samples.
Hearsay Evidence – Generally inadmissible unless exceptions apply (Section 32-33).
2. Admissibility Rules in Criminal Proceedings
Key Principles under Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
Relevance (Section 5, 6)
Evidence must be relevant to the facts of the case. Irrelevant evidence is inadmissible.
Opinion Evidence (Sections 45-51)
Experts can give opinion on matters requiring specialized knowledge.
Laypersons cannot give expert opinion.
Hearsay and Dying Declarations (Section 32)
Dying declarations are admissible if made under sincerity and immediacy.
Confessions (Sections 24-30)
Voluntary confessions are admissible; coerced confessions are not.
Electronic Records (Sections 65A & 65B)
Requires certification under Section 65B for admissibility in court.
Burden of Proof (Sections 101-114)
Prosecution bears burden to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Accused may raise defenses; burden may shift for specific statutory exceptions.
Chain of Custody and Authentication
Evidence must be shown to be unaltered, authentic, and connected to the accused.
3. Case Law Examples
Case 1: State of UP v. Rajesh Gautam (2003)
Facts:
Rajesh Gautam was accused of murder.
Evidence included dying declaration recorded by police.
Legal Issue:
Whether dying declaration recorded by police is admissible.
Outcome:
Supreme Court held dying declaration is admissible even if recorded by police, but the court must carefully evaluate reliability.
Court emphasized corroboration with other evidence.
Significance:
Confirms the principle under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act.
Case 2: State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996)
Facts:
Accused charged with murder based on confessions to co-accused.
Legal Issue:
Admissibility of confessions made to another person (not a police officer).
Outcome:
Supreme Court held confession to a co-accused is admissible under Section 13 but needs corroboration.
Significance:
Clarified distinction between confession to police (inadmissible under Section 25) and to third parties.
Case 3: State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (2003)
Facts:
In a medical negligence case leading to death, expert opinion on cause of death was presented.
Legal Issue:
Whether expert opinion can override clinical evidence.
Outcome:
Court held expert evidence must be considered with other evidence, cannot be sole basis unless clear and uncontroverted.
Significance:
Reinforces Sections 45-51 on opinion evidence.
Expert opinion helps courts but does not replace primary evidence.
Case 4: Anvar P.V v. P.K. Basheer (2014)
Facts:
Digital evidence (CD of phone calls and emails) was produced without proper certification under Section 65B.
Legal Issue:
Admissibility of electronic records without certificate.
Outcome:
Supreme Court held electronic evidence is inadmissible without Section 65B certificate.
Significance:
Landmark case establishing strict compliance for electronic evidence in criminal trials.
Case 5: Sakshi v. Union of India (2004)
Facts:
Case involved rape allegations where witness testimony and medical evidence were key.
Legal Issue:
Whether testimony of a victim is sufficient without corroboration.
Outcome:
Court held victim’s testimony can be sufficient, especially in sexual assault cases, but must be credible and consistent.
Significance:
Demonstrates flexibility in oral evidence admissibility, particularly in sexual offenses.
Case 6: K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra (1962)
Facts:
Famous case involving confession and circumstantial evidence in a murder trial.
Legal Issue:
Admissibility of circumstantial evidence and confession to police.
Outcome:
Court emphasized corroboration of circumstantial evidence and rejected coerced confession.
Significance:
Laid down principles for evaluating circumstantial evidence and confessions under Indian Evidence Act.
Case 7: Tukaram S. Dighole v. State of Maharashtra (2010)
Facts:
Accused challenged admissibility of electronic evidence in a cybercrime case.
Legal Issue:
Whether electronic records without proper certification are valid.
Outcome:
Court reaffirmed Anvar P.V ruling, stressing strict compliance with Section 65B.
Significance:
Shows consistent approach to digital evidence in criminal proceedings.
4. Key Takeaways
Dying Declarations and Confessions are admissible under strict conditions.
Expert Opinion assists courts but cannot replace primary evidence.
Electronic Evidence requires certification (Section 65B) for admissibility.
Oral and Circumstantial Evidence remain important, particularly when corroborated.
Courts balance reliability, relevance, and corroboration before admitting evidence.
RELATED Blog
comments