X killed Y, and within a short period, it was reported that the news had sensationalized the media and surrounding areas. The case was immediately disclosed to the police and went to the courts. However, how do courts determine the possibility that X killed Y? If you think the media can be relied on, there isn’t any. The answer is NO! The courts will hold trials to examine the case details to determine the issue. Anyone who witnessed the crime might be able to help as well, the weapon used in the killing might help, and a confession of a dying person could be helpful, as well as evidence found at the crime scene may assist. The factors mentioned above summarize the evidence needed to establish the case that X killed Y or if it’s another party who has put the responsibility on X. This is because the Indian Evidence Act paves the way for the obtaining of evidence that is relevant and admissible in a court of law.

The word”evidence” is derived from the Latin phrase apparent or evidence meaning to prove or show clearly. Logically, courts rely on evidence, and the applicable laws offer guidelines. One refers to The Indian Evidence Act 1872, which explains in detail what type of evidence is admissible for evidence in a court of law. In criminal proceedings, collecting evidence begins when the FOI is registered with police officers. In civil cases, the parties involved must provide evidence to support their claim independently. In most cases, there isn’t a public authority, such as the police, to aid in collecting evidence in civil proceedings.

History of Indian Evidence Act, 1872

When there is a debate, facts, things, and information are necessary. To back up the idea that is being made. It is rooted in logic, reason, and the commonsense to determine the truth about when and why they occur. Even the earliest India led by Dharma valued’saakshya, meaning evidence to determine the truth. To establish the truth, it’s essential to remember the specifics of the event that led to the circumstances and individuals who support the sequence of events in the incident, as no one could go back in time to watch the event all over again. Evidence is apparent in the Muslim dynasty too.

The present Evidence Act of 1872 was passed in the era of the British government in India that Sir James Fitz James Stephens handed over. While it was enacted in 1872 by the English government, the legislation is still a part of the current legal system of India. The last seventy years since independence and the development of law, saw several changes regarding the rules of proof by modifications and case laws.

What are the Main Features of the Indian Evidence Act?

The Evidence Act applies to all instances of judicial procedure at any tribunal in India. It also covers court materials. The exceptions are arbitration proceedings and affidavits presented before an officer or the court.

The Act is in constant dialogue with the advancement of Criminal law.

In light of the technological advances in recent times, the significance of digital evidence is also analyzed.

The Indian Evidence Act respects the importance of what is witnessed in person compared to information that someone else hears. This reinforces the importance of evidence that is real and direct.

Evidence law considers the distinction between civil and criminal law and makes provisions in line with that distinction.

The Act also outlines the time when a claim is proven or disproved with the help of evidence.

The burden of evidence is usually on the prosecutor who is accusing one another in criminal cases and those who are plaintiffs in civil matters seeking relief. The Evidence Act of 1872 clarifies circumstances in which a particular fact shifts the burden of evidence.

The suspects are suspected of using force against the suspects, and confessions out of court aren’t reliable evidence by the 1872 Act.

The Act provides a legal basis for the expression “court may presume,” leaving the judge with discretionary power to decide whether or not the officer to choose whether or not respect specific evidence. However, phrases such as “shall presume” leave no discretion for judges; however, they require the acceptance of specific evidence.

The Act isn’t conclusive regarding the evidence that courts use in court. Other laws, such as the Criminal Procedure Code, Indian Penal Code, Code of Civil Procedure, Indian Stamp Act, etc., are also supplementary to relevant provisions.

Types of Evidence in the Evidence Act, 1872

Different terms have been employed in the field of evidence law that has been used to distinguish between different kinds of evidence that are presented before the courts of India. Certain evidence that appear essential to a case at a glance might not be admissible in the courts. Certain evidence pieces are more important and have more excellent quality when compared with others. The following points illustrate the categorization of evidence as per The Evidence Act in India:

Direct and Circumstantial Evidence

Direct evidence, as the name suggests, has direct evidence that proves the facts at issue. It confirms an assertion that does need further analysis from anyone. As per reports, examples of direct evidence are an axe dipped in the victim’s blood, in which the victim was killed using an abrasive weapon. In contrast, circumstantial evidence offers connections to the facts. It is much more difficult to conceal and, therefore, is generally more trustworthy. Examples include the victim’s possessions discovered at the scene of the crime.