Osmania University · Faculty of Law
Law of Evidence · August/September 2013 (old)
August/September (old) 2013 · Law of Evidence · Semester 2
FACULTY OF LAW
LL.B. (3 YDC) III Year V Semester (Old) Examination, August / September 2013
Subject: LAW
PAPER - III: LAW OF EVIDENCE
Code: 4539/O | Time: 3 Hours | Max. Marks: 80
PART - A (5 x 6 = 30 Marks) — Write short notes on any five of the following.
1. Burden of Proof.
2. Facts in Issue.
3. Res gestae.
4. Conspiracy.
5. Document.
6. Child Witness.
7. Hearsay Evidence.
8. Privileged Communications.
PART - B (2 x 15 = 30 Marks) — Answer any two of the following.
9. Discuss the relevancy of a confession made while in the custody of the police.
10. Explain the principles regarding the admissibility of a Dying Declaration. Why and when is a
Dying Declaration relevant?
11. "Oral evidence must, in all cases whatever, be direct." Explain and state the exception to this
rule.
12. Discuss the stages of examination of a witness. When can a party be permitted to cross-examine
his own witness?
PART - C (2 x 10 = 20 Marks) — Answer any two of the following.
13. X, an accused in a murder case, was absconding, and in the trial X was convicted. Later, after 5
years, X was caught and was tried separately. The prosecution alleges that Y committed the murder.
Y was absconding, and in the trial of Y , is the evidence given in the trial of X admissible?
14. Two sisters, S1 and S2, were staying in their house. X, the accused, who was S1's husband, came
there shouting at S1 and attacked her for deserting him. She died on the spot. The other sister, S2,
was the only eye witness to this gruesome murder. Before the trial of X commenced, S2 also died
due to a disease in a hospital while undergoing treatment. However, while in hospital she clearly
stated to the doctor how X killed her sister S1. The doctor recorded the statement and she signed it.
This statement of S2 to the doctor is adduced in evidence in the murder trial of X. Decide the
admissibility.
15. X states to his wife that he was proceeding to Delhi to meet Y and collect a debt due from him,
and proceeds to the house of Y at Delhi, where he was murdered by Y . Is the statement made by X
to his wife admissible? Under which Section? Elaborate, citing case law.
16. A is accused of cheating B by placing an order and receiving goods with the intention of not
paying for them. Evidence is sought to be given that on previous occasions A placed orders for
goods, received them, and did not pay in due time. Will those previous instances be relevant, and if
so, under which provision of the Indian Evidence Act?