Related Questions

Each material circumstance appearing in evidence against the accused must be put to the accused specifically, distinctly and separately. In this context, the propositions are
1. Failure to put the material evidence to the accused always vitiates the trial
2. Failure to put the material evidence amounts to a serious irregularity which can not be cured and vitiates the trial, if it has prejudiced the accused.
3. Failure to put the material evidence is not considered to services & is curable if infact no failure of justice has occasioned to the accused.
Now which of the following is correct
Under which Section of the Indian Evidence Act, the burden of proving that the case of an accused comes within the exceptions, lies on the accused?
Nothing in section 23 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 shall be taken to exempt any barrister, pleader attorney or vakil from giving evidence of any matter of which he may be compelled to give evidence is provided by the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, under:
Under Indian Evidence Act, 1872, in a trial, the burden of proving the plea of insanity of accused lies on:
Under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, in respect of confessional evidence
1. So much of the information as it relates distinctly to the fact discovered in consequence of information received from the person accused may be proved against him.
2. Person giving such information must be accused of an offence.
3. Accused need not be in the police custody.
4. Any statement of the accused confessing his guilt must be made in presence of a Magistrate, in all cases, whether anything is discovered or not in consequence of such statement, may be proved against him.
Select the incorrect statements:
1. The Indian Evidence Act does not apply to arbitration proceedings.
2. The Indian Evidence Act does not apply to proceedings before a Commissioner appointed by the court for recording evidence
3. The Indian Evidence Act applies to affidavits presented to Courts
4. The Indian Evidence Act applies to judicial proceedings held before all kinds of military courts
In prosecution for an offence under section 376 of Indian Penal Code, where the question of consent is an issue, it shall not be permissible to adduce evidence or to put questions in the cross examination of the victim as to the general immoral character, or previous sexual experience, of such victim with any person for proving such consent or the quality of consent is provided in which Section of Indian Evidence Act.
The burden of proving the existence of circumstances bringing the case within the General Exceptions in Indian Penal Code is
The burden of proving that the case of the accused comes within any of the General Exceptions in the Indian Penal Code is upon the
Carefully read following statements:
1. According to Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, requirement is of two persons, whereas under Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, requirement is of five persons.
2. According to Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, common intention is required whereas under Section 149 Indian Penal Code, common object is required
3. Previous consent is required under Section 34 & 149 of Indian Penal Code
4. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 149 of Indian Penal Code constitutes a specific offence
Which of the above statements is true: