Comments on: Indian Evidence Act’s Four Most Important Questions!

By: Writing Law

Writing Law — Sun, 23 Dec 2018 18:30:36 +0000

Hi Tejas, hope you are doing excellent.
(It was bit hard for me to precisely understand what you are saying. Here is my reply based on my understanding of your comment.)

Evidence is given only for facts in issue and relevant facts and NOT for law.
Evidence Act itself clears this expression if we go to its interpretation clause and derive the meaning, what statute intends to give us.

(Section 57 of Indian evidence Act clearly gives the list of facts which are not required to be proved before court as they are judicially noticeable facts and the law of the country is the first entry in that list.)

Order VI of CPC which describes manner of pleading also states that pleading should contain material facts only and not any law or evidence because law is presumed to be in the knowledge of judicial body therefore no evidence is required be stated.

Hope it helps. (Feel free to debate / correct / add to my comment.)

By: TEJAS PATEL

TEJAS PATEL — Sun, 23 Dec 2018 02:55:16 +0000

This is my discovery. I post it first in the Wikipedia. There is two things required to understand. In the first question its stated that the Evidence is given only for law and not evidence is not true. Law and Facts are connected to each other. like LAW says Any one do not wear helmet shall be punishable with fine. FACT is mr.A has not wear helmet so he is liable to pay fine. Moreover For showing some laws of land or foreign laws etc. Evidence by gazette copy can be given and that is evidence.

By: Writing Law

Writing Law — Thu, 20 Sep 2018 13:04:41 +0000

In reply to Prasanna kumary. Glad you liked it. Hope it was useful.

By: Prasanna kumary

Prasanna kumary — Wed, 01 Aug 2018 17:24:08 +0000

This notes very useful to study and it is very understand