Delhi Judicial Services Exam Law of Evidence Syllabus

Law of Evidence syllabus — full chapter and topic list

Expand any chapter to see its topics and sub-topics. This is the whole examinable outline for Law of Evidence in Delhi Judicial Services Exam, not a summary of it.

1. 1

   Relevancy of Facts

   6 topics

   • Preliminary concepts
     • Fact, fact in issue and relevant fact
     • Evidence: oral and documentary
     • Proved, disproved and not proved
   • Doctrine of res gestae and connected facts
   • Motive, preparation and conduct
   • Conspiracy and Section 10
   • Admissions and confessions
     • Confession to police and Section 25 and 26
     • Section 27 and discovery of facts
     • Extra-judicial confession
   • Dying declaration and statements of persons who cannot be called
2. 2

   Opinion, Character & Judgments

   3 topics

   • Expert opinion
     • Handwriting, fingerprint and DNA evidence
     • Evidentiary value of expert testimony
   • Relevancy of judgments
   • Character evidence in civil and criminal cases
3. 3

   Proof: Oral & Documentary Evidence

   4 topics

   • Oral evidence and the best evidence rule
   • Primary and secondary evidence
   • Proof of documents and electronic records
     • Section 65B certification
     • Public and private documents
   • Exclusion of oral by documentary evidence (Sections 91 to 100)
4. 4

   Burden of Proof & Presumptions

   3 topics

   • Burden of proof and onus
     • Standard in civil and criminal cases
     • Burden in special situations
   • Presumptions
     • May presume, shall presume and conclusive proof
     • Presumption of legitimacy (Section 112)
   • Estoppel
     • Estoppel by conduct
     • Estoppel of tenant and licensee
5. 5

   Witnesses & Examination

   5 topics

   • Competency and compellability of witnesses
   • Privileged communications
     • Judicial and official communications
     • Professional communications and Section 126
   • Examination-in-chief, cross-examination and re-examination
   • Leading questions, hostile witness and impeaching credit
   • Refreshing memory and corroboration

Law of Evidence flashcards for Delhi Judicial Services Exam

21 of 61 cards from the Law of Evidence deck — real questions with worked answers.

1. Under the Indian Evidence law, how is a 'fact' defined?

   A fact means anything, state of things, or relation of things capable of being perceived by the senses, and any mental condition of which any person is conscious. It includes both physical facts and psychological facts (e.g., reputation, intention, good faith).

2. Distinguish between 'fact in issue' and 'relevant fact'.

   A fact in issue is one which by itself or in connection with others determines the existence, nature, or extent of a right, liability, or disability asserted or denied in a suit/proceeding. A relevant fact is one connected to a fact in issue in any of the ways laid down in the relevancy provisions (Sections 6 to 55); it is admissible because of that connection.

3. What is the difference between 'may presume', 'shall presume', and 'conclusive proof'?

   'May presume' gives the court discretion to presume a fact or call for proof (rebuttable). 'Shall presume' obliges the court to presume the fact unless disproved (rebuttable but mandatory presumption). 'Conclusive proof' means once the basic fact is proved, the court must treat the other fact as proved and shall NOT allow evidence to disprove it (irrebuttable).

4. State the doctrine of res gestae as recognised in the law of evidence.

   Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places. Such facts (res gestae) are admissible as spontaneous and contemporaneous parts of the transaction.

5. What is the test for a statement to qualify as part of the res gestae?

   The statement must be substantially contemporaneous with the act/transaction (spontaneous, made under stress of excitement without opportunity for fabrication or reflection). A statement made after a time gap allowing concoction is excluded.

6. Name the categories of facts made relevant as connected with a fact in issue beyond res gestae.

   Facts which are the occasion, cause, or effect of facts in issue/relevant facts; facts constituting the state of things or opportunity for the occurrence; and facts showing motive, preparation, and previous or subsequent conduct. Also facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts, support/rebut inferences, establish identity, fix time/place, or show relationship of parties.

7. How are motive, preparation, and conduct treated under the law of evidence?

   Any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact. The previous or subsequent conduct of any party or his agent, and of any person an offence against whom is the subject of proceeding, is relevant if it influences or is influenced by a fact in issue or relevant fact.

8. When is the 'conduct' of a person relevant, and what is the limit on statements as conduct?

   Conduct is relevant only if it influences or is influenced by a fact in issue/relevant fact. A statement is not 'conduct' unless it accompanies and explains acts other than statements; but a statement made to a person whose conduct is relevant, if it affects such conduct, is itself relevant as explaining the conduct.

9. State the rule on relevancy of facts forming part of a conspiracy (Section 10 principle).

   Where there is reasonable ground to believe that two or more persons have conspired to commit an offence or actionable wrong, anything said, done, or written by any one of them in reference to their common intention, after the time it was first entertained, is a relevant fact against each of the conspirators for proving the existence of the conspiracy and that any person was a party to it.

10. What are the two essential pre-conditions for invoking the conspiracy rule (Section 10)?

    (1) There must be reasonable ground to believe that a conspiracy existed; and (2) the act/statement sought to be proved must have been said, done, or written by a co-conspirator in reference to the common intention and during the existence/subsistence of the conspiracy (not before it began or after it ended).

11. Define 'admission' in the law of evidence.

    An admission is a statement, oral or documentary or contained in electronic form, which suggests an inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by any of the persons (party, agent, predecessor in interest, etc.) and under the circumstances specified by law.

12. Are admissions conclusive proof of the matters admitted?

    No. Admissions are not conclusive proof; they may operate as estoppel or be explained or shown to be wrong, but they are strong evidence against the maker. They are relevant and may be proved against the person making them or his representative-in-interest.

13. State the general rule and exceptions for a person proving his own admissions.

    General rule: admissions cannot be proved BY the person who makes them or by his representative (a party cannot make self-serving evidence). Exceptions: it may be proved by/on behalf of the maker when (a) it would be admissible as a dying declaration or under res gestae, (b) it consists of a statement of mental/bodily state accompanied by relevant conduct, or (c) it is otherwise relevant independently of being an admission.

14. Define 'confession' and how it differs from an admission.

    A confession is an admission made by an accused person stating or suggesting the inference that he committed the offence, or admitting substantially all the facts constituting the offence. Every confession is an admission, but not every admission is a confession; confession applies only in criminal cases and only to the accused regarding guilt.

15. When is a confession irrelevant due to inducement, threat, or promise?

    A confession is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding if it appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat, or promise having reference to the charge, proceeding from a person in authority, and sufficient in the court's opinion to give the accused reasonable grounds for supposing he would gain an advantage or avoid an evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings.

16. State the rule on confessions made to police officers and while in police custody.

    No confession made to a police officer can be proved against an accused. No confession made by a person while in police custody can be proved against him unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate. (This bars confessions to police to prevent coercion.)

17. What is the 'discovery of fact' exception to the bar on custodial statements?

    When any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from an accused in police custody, so much of that information as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered may be proved, whether or not it amounts to a confession. Only the portion leading distinctly to the discovery is admissible.

18. Define a 'dying declaration' and state the legal maxim behind it.

    A dying declaration is a statement, written or verbal, made by a person as to the cause of his death or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction resulting in his death, where the cause of that person's death comes into question. It rests on the maxim 'Nemo moriturus praesumitur mentire' (a person on the verge of death is presumed not to lie).

19. What conditions make statements of persons who cannot be called as witnesses relevant?

    Statements of relevant facts by a person who is dead, cannot be found, has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured without unreasonable delay/expense are relevant in specified cases: e.g., dying declarations; statements in the course of business; against the maker's pecuniary/proprietary interest; opinion on public right/custom; relationship; and statements in wills/deeds relating to family affairs.

20. Is a dying declaration required to be corroborated, and can it alone sustain a conviction?

    A dying declaration need not be corroborated as a matter of law. If the court is satisfied that it is true, voluntary, and not the product of tutoring/imagination, it can form the sole basis of conviction. Corroboration is a rule of prudence, not of law.

21. When is the opinion of an expert relevant under the law of evidence?

    When the court has to form an opinion on a point of foreign law, science, art, or as to identity of handwriting, finger impressions, or electronic evidence, the opinions of persons specially skilled in such matters (experts) are relevant facts.

See more Law of Evidence flashcards →

Planning Law of Evidence for Delhi Judicial Services Exam

Law of Evidence (Delhi Judicial Services Exam) FAQ