Law of Evidence (Indian Evidence Act, 1872 & BSA, 2023)

Discuss the law relating to confessions under Sections 24 to 30 of the Indian Evidence Act. When is a confession relevant and when is it irrelevant? Explain the difference between a 'judicial confession' and an 'extra-judicial confession'. Can a retracted confession form the sole basis of conviction? Analyse with reference to Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor (AIR 1939 PC 47), Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani (AIR 1978 SC 1025), and Sahoo v. State of U.P. (AIR 1966 SC 40).[10 Marks]

Explain the provisions relating to dying declarations under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act (corresponding to Section 26 of BSA 2023). What is the evidentiary value of a dying declaration? Is it necessary that the declarant should have been in expectation of death at the time of making the statement? Can a conviction be based solely on a dying declaration? Discuss with reference to Khushal Rao v. State of Bombay (AIR 1958 SC 22), Laxman v. State of Maharashtra (2002) 6 SCC 710, and Paniben v. State of Gujarat (1992) 2 SCC 474.[10 Marks]

Discuss the admissibility of electronic evidence under Section 65-B of the Indian Evidence Act (corresponding to Section 63 of BSA 2023). What are the mandatory requirements for proving electronic records? Analyse the conflicting views of the Supreme Court in Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014) 10 SCC 473 and Shafhi Mohammad v. State of H.P. (2018) 2 SCC 801, and the final resolution in Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) 7 SCC 1.[10 Marks]

Discuss the law relating to expert opinion under Sections 45 to 51 of the Indian Evidence Act. What is the evidentiary value of expert testimony? Is the court bound by the opinion of an expert? When can the court disregard expert evidence? Analyse with reference to Ramesh Chandra Agrawal v. Regency Hospital (2009) 9 SCC 709, State of Himachal Pradesh v. Jai Lal (1999) 7 SCC 280, and the admissibility of DNA evidence as expert opinion.[10 Marks]

Examine the provisions relating to examination of witnesses under Sections 135 to 166 of the Indian Evidence Act. Discuss: (a) The order of examination of witnesses; (b) The scope and purpose of cross-examination under Section 138; (c) The rules relating to re-examination; (d) The power of the court to put questions to witnesses under Section 165. Analyse with reference to Laxmipat Choraria v. State of Maharashtra (1968) 2 SCR 624 and Khatri v. State of Bihar (1981) 1 SCC 627.[10 Marks]

A is prosecuted for the murder of B. The prosecution relies on the following evidence: (i) A dying declaration made by B to his neighbour C, in which B stated that A had stabbed him -- B died three days later and the declaration was oral and not recorded by a Magistrate; (ii) A confession made by A to a police officer during investigation; (iii) CCTV footage from a nearby shop, produced without a certificate under Section 65-B; (iv) Expert opinion of a forensic specialist that the fingerprints found on the knife match A's fingerprints; (v) Testimony of D, an accomplice, who states that he and A planned the murder together. Discuss the admissibility and evidentiary value of each piece of evidence. Can A be convicted based on this evidence?[15 Marks]

Critically examine the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) vis-a-vis the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with special reference to: (a) The changes in the definition and treatment of electronic evidence under Section 63 of BSA compared to Section 65-B of the Evidence Act; (b) The new provisions relating to oral evidence given through electronic means (Section 24 BSA); (c) The treatment of confessions and their admissibility; (d) The modifications in the rules of presumption applicable to electronic records and digital signatures. Discuss whether the BSA 2023 adequately addresses the challenges posed by modern technology in the law of evidence. Refer to the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the BSA 2023 and relevant judicial pronouncements under the old Act.[15 Marks]

X is accused of committing dowry death of his wife Y. Y's mother Z testifies that Y told her over the phone, two days before her death, that X had been demanding a car as additional dowry and was torturing her. X objects to the admissibility of Z's testimony on the ground that it is hearsay. Discuss: Is Z's testimony admissible under Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act? Can it also be relevant under Section 6 (res gestae) or Section 8 (motive)? Refer to State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram (2006) 12 SCC 254.[5 Marks]

Explain the doctrine of burden of proof in civil and criminal cases. How does Section 101 differ from Section 102 of the Evidence Act? Discuss the shifting of burden of proof with reference to presumptions under Sections 113-A and 113-B. Analyse Sham Shankar Kanojia v. State of Maharashtra (2017 Cri LJ 3786) and Vipin Jaiswal v. State of A.P. (2013) 3 SCC 684.[5 Marks]

In a trial for cheating, the prosecution produces a WhatsApp conversation between the accused and the complainant as evidence of fraudulent intent. The conversation was retrieved from the complainant's phone and printed. The accused objects to its admissibility, contending that no certificate under Section 65-B(4) has been produced and the original electronic device has not been produced. Discuss: (a) Is the WhatsApp conversation admissible as electronic evidence? (b) What are the mandatory procedural requirements for its admissibility? (c) Can secondary evidence of electronic records be led without a Section 65-B certificate? Refer to Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020) 7 SCC 1.[5 Marks]

Discuss the law relating to the evidence of an accomplice under Section 133 of the Evidence Act. Is the testimony of an accomplice sufficient for conviction without corroboration? What is the nature and extent of corroboration required? Analyse with reference to Sarwan Singh Rattan Singh v. State of Punjab (AIR 1957 SC 637), Ravinder Singh v. State of Haryana (1975) 3 SCC 742, and Mrinal Das v. State of Tripura (2011) 9 SCC 479.[5 Marks]

A files a civil suit against B for breach of contract. A produces a photocopy of the written agreement as the original is claimed to have been lost. B objects, arguing that secondary evidence cannot be produced without accounting for the non-production of the primary evidence. Discuss: (a) Under what circumstances can secondary evidence be admitted under Section 65? (b) What is the procedure to be followed before admitting secondary evidence? (c) Can the court accept the photocopy without further proof of loss? Refer to Ashok Dulichand v. Madahavlal Dube (1975) 4 SCC 664 and H. Siddiqui v. A. Ramalingam (2011) 4 SCC 240.[5 Marks]