Author Archives: Advocate Paresh M Modi

Section 33: Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, the truth of facts therein stated. — Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorized by law to take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable:

Provided — that the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest; that the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine; that the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding.

Explanation — A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of this section.

धारा-33: किसी साक्ष्य में कथित तथ्यों की सम्यता को प्रश्चात्वर्ती कार्यवाही मेंसाबित करने के लिए उस साक्ष्य की सुसंगति – वह साक्ष्य, जो किसी साक्षी ने किसी न्यायिक कार्यवाही में, या किसी साक्षी ने किसी न्यायिक कार्यवाही में, या विधि द्वारा उसे लेने के लिए प्राधिकृत किसी व्यक्ति के समक्ष दिया है, उन तथ्यों की सत्यता को, जो उस साक्ष्य में कथित है, किसी पश्चातवर्ती न्यायिक कार्यवाहि में या उसी न्यायिक कार्यवाही के आगामी प्रक्रम में साबित करने के प्रयोजन के लिये तब सुसंगत है; जबकि वह साक्षी मर गया है या मिल नहीं सकता है, या वह साक्ष्य देने के लिए असमर्थ है या प्रतिपक्षी द्वारा उसे पहुँच के बाहर कर दिया गया है अथवा यदि उसकी उपस्थिति इतने विलम्ब या व्यय के बिना, जितना कि मामले को परिस्थितियों में न्यायालय अयुक्तियुक्त समझता है, अभिप्राप्त नहीं की जा सकती।

प्ररन्तु वह तब जब कि वह कार्यवाही उन्हीं पक्षकारों या उनके हित प्रतिनिधियों के बीच में थी, प्रथम कार्यवाही में प्रतिपक्षी को प्रतिपरीक्षा का अधिकार और अवसर था, विवाद्य प्रश्न ािर्यवाही में सारतः वही थे जो द्वितीय कार्यवाही में हैं।

स्पष्टीकरण– दाण्डिक विचारण या जांच इस धारा के अर्थ के अन्तर्गत अभियोजक और अभियुक्त के बीच कार्यवाही समझी जायेगी।

Advocate Paresh M Modi is a highly regarded advocate based in Ahmedabad, known for his expertise in criminal law. As a distinguished lawyer at the Gujarat High Court, he specializes in a wide range of legal matters, making him a sought-after professional in various areas of law. Some of his notable specializations include handling cases related to cheque bounce, property disputes, cybercrime, court marriages, divorces, debt recovery tribunals (DRT), FIR quashing, land revenue disputes, anticipatory bail, PASA (Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act), family law, civil law, and more. Advocate Paresh M Modi is a highly skilled lawyer practicing at the Gujarat High Court Lawyer in Ahmedabad. With his extensive experience and expertise, He has established himself as a renowned advocate in the region. Stay connected with him on social media for updates:

Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | Instagram | YouTube

Follow Advocate Paresh M Modi, the esteemed lawyer, for valuable insights, legal analysis, and engaging discussions. Stay informed about the law and legal developments through his informative content. In the meantime, check out other Information from Home Page, or call us at Landline No: +91-79-48001468 or Phone & WhatsApp No: +91 99250 02031.

Section- 6: Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction. — Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places.

Illustrations-

(a) A is accused of the murder of B by beating him. Whatever was said or done by A or B or the by-standers at the beating, or so shortly before or after it as to form part of the transaction, is a relevant fact.

(b) A is accused of waging war against the 1[Government of India] by taking part in an armed insurrection in which property is destroyed, troops are attacked, and goals are broken open. The occurrence of these facts is relevant, as forming part of the general transaction, though A may not have been present at all of them.

(c) A sues B for a libel contained in a letter forming part of a correspondence. Letters between the parties relating to the subject out of which the libel arose, and forming part of the correspondence in which it is contained, are relevant facts, though they do not contain the libel itself.

(d) The question is, whether certain goods ordered from B were delivered to A. The goods were delivered to several intermediate persons successively. Each delivery is a relevant fact.

धारा 6: एक ही संव्यवहार के भाग होने वाले तथ्यों की सुसंगति – जो तथ्य विवाद्य न होते हुए भी किसी विवाद्यक तथ्य उस प्रकार संसक्त हैं िकवे एक ही संव्यवहार के भाग हैं, वे तथ्य सुसंगात हैं चाहे वे उसी समय और स्थान पर या विभिन्न समयों और स्थानों पर घटित हुए हों।

दृष्टान्त-

(क) ख को पीट कर उसकी हत्या करने का क अभियुक्त हैं। क या ख या पास खड़े लोगों द्वारा जो कुछ भी पिठाई के समय या उससे इतने अल्पकाल पूर्व या पश्चात् कहा या किया गया थ िकवह उसी संव्यवहार का भाग बन गया है, वह सुसंगत तथ्य है।

(ख) क एक सशस्त्र विप्लव में भग लेकर, जिसमें सम्पत्ति नष्ट की जाती है, फौजों पर आक्रमण किया जाता है और जेलें जोड़कर खोली जाती है। भारत सरकार के विरुद्ध युद्ध करने का अभियुक्त हैं। इनत थ्यों का घटित होना साधारण संव्यवहार का भाग होने के नाते सुसंगत है चाहे स उन सभी में उपस्थित न रहा हो।

(ग) क एक प्रश्न में, जो एक पत्र व्यवहार का भाग है, अन्पर्विष्ट अपमान-लेख के लिय ख पर वाद लाता हैं जिस विषय में अपमान-लेख उद्भूत हुआ है, उससे सम्बन्ध रखने वाले पक्षकारों के बीच जितनी चिट्ठियाँ उस पत्र-व्यवहार का भाग हैं हजसमें वह अन्तविष्ट है वे सुसंगत तथ्य है, चाहे उनमें वह अपमान-लेख स्वयं अन्तर्विष्ट न हो।

(घ) प्रश्न यह है कि ख से आदिष्ट अमुक माल क को परिदत्त किया गया था। वह माल, अनुक्रमशः कई मध्यवर्ती व्यक्तियों को परिदत्त किया गया था। हर एक परिदान सुसंगत तथ्य है।

Advocate Paresh M Modi is a highly regarded advocate based in Ahmedabad, known for his expertise in criminal law. As a distinguished lawyer at the Gujarat High Court, he specializes in a wide range of legal matters, making him a sought-after professional in various areas of law. Some of his notable specializations include handling cases related to cheque bounce, property disputes, cybercrime, court marriages, divorces, debt recovery tribunals (DRT), FIR quashing, land revenue disputes, anticipatory bail, PASA (Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act), family law, civil law, and more. Advocate Paresh M Modi is a highly skilled lawyer practicing at the Gujarat High Court Lawyer in Ahmedabad. With his extensive experience and expertise, He has established himself as a renowned advocate in the region. Stay connected with him on social media for updates:

Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | Instagram | YouTube

Follow Advocate Paresh M Modi, the esteemed lawyer, for valuable insights, legal analysis, and engaging discussions. Stay informed about the law and legal developments through his informative content. In the meantime, check out other Information from Home Page, or call us at Landline No: +91-79-48001468 or Phone & WhatsApp No: +91 99250 02031.

Section 5 Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts. – Evidence may be given in any suit or proceedings of the existence or non-existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others.

Explanation. — This section shall not enable any person to give evidence of a fact which he is disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force relating to Civil Procedure1..—This section shall not enable any person to give evidence of a fact which he is disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force relating to Civil Procedure1.”

Illustrations

(a) A is tried for the murder of B by beating him with a club with the intention of causing his death. At A’s trial the following facts are in issue:— A’s beating B with the club; A’s causing B’s death by such beating; A’s intention to cause B’s death.

(b) A suitor does not bring with him, and have in readiness for production at the first hearing of the case, a bond on which he relies. This section does not enable him to produce the bond or prove its contents at a subsequent stage of the proceedings, otherwise than in accordance with the conditions prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure.

धारा 5 विवाद्यक तथ्यों और सुसंगत तथ्यों का साक्ष्य दिया ना सकेगा – किसी वाद या कार्यवाही में हर विवाद्यक तथ्य के और ऐसे अन्य तथ्यों के, जिन्हें एतस्मिन् पश्चात् सुसंगत घाषित किया गया है, अस्तित्व या अनस्तित्व का साक्ष्य दिया जा सकेगा और किन्हीं अन्यों का नहीं।

स्पष्टीकरण – यह धारा किसी व्यक्ति को ऐसे तथ्य का साक्ष्य देने के लिये योग्य नहीं बनायेगी, जिससे सिविल प्रक्रिया से सम्बन्धित किसी तत्समय प्रवृत्त विधि के किसी उपबन्ध द्वारा वह साबित करने के निर्हकित कर दिया गया है।

दृष्टान्त

(क) ख की मृत्यु कारित करने के आशय से उसे लाठी मार उसकी हत्या कारित करने के लिये क का विचारण किया जाता है।क के विचारण में निम्नलिखित तथ्य विवाद्य हैं-क का ख को लाठी से मारना; क का ऐसी मार द्वारा ख की मृत्यु कारित करना;ख की मृत्यु कारित करने का क का आशय।

(ख) एक वादकर्ता अपने साथ वह बन्धपत्र, निस पर वह निर्भर करता है, मामले की पहली सुनवाई पर अपने साथ नहीं लाता और पेश करने के लिये तैयार नहीं रखता। यह धारा उसे इस योग्य नहीं बनाती कि सिविल प्रक्रिया संहिता द्वारा विहित शर्तों के अनुकूल वह उस कार्यवाही से उत्तरवर्ती प्रक्रम में उस बन्धपत्र को पेश कर सके या उसकी अन्र्तवस्तु को साबित कर सके।

Advocate Paresh M Modi is a highly regarded advocate based in Ahmedabad, known for his expertise in criminal law. As a distinguished lawyer at the Gujarat High Court, he specializes in a wide range of legal matters, making him a sought-after professional in various areas of law. Some of his notable specializations include handling cases related to cheque bounce, property disputes, cybercrime, court marriages, divorces, debt recovery tribunals (DRT), FIR quashing, land revenue disputes, anticipatory bail, PASA (Prevention of Anti-Social Activities Act), family law, civil law, and more. Advocate Paresh M Modi is a highly skilled lawyer practicing at the Gujarat High Court Lawyer in Ahmedabad. With his extensive experience and expertise, He has established himself as a renowned advocate in the region. Stay connected with him on social media for updates:

Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | Instagram | YouTube

Follow Advocate Paresh M Modi, the esteemed lawyer, for valuable insights, legal analysis, and engaging discussions. Stay informed about the law and legal developments through his informative content. In the meantime, check out other Information from Home Page, or call us at Landline No: +91-79-48001468 or Phone & WhatsApp No: +91 99250 02031.