Author Archives: Advocate Paresh M Modi

Section-60 :- Oral evidence must be direct.-

Oral evidence must, in all cases whatever, be direct; that is to say— If it refers to a fact which could be seen, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he saw it; If it refers to a fact which could be heard, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he heard it; If it refers to a fact which could be perceived by any other sense or in any other manner, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he perceived it by that sense or in that manner; If it refers to an opinion or to the grounds on which that opinion is held, it must be the evidence of the person who holds that opinion on those grounds: Provided that the opinions of experts expressed in any treatise commonly offered for sale, and the grounds on which such opinions are held, may be proved by the production of such treatises if the author is dead or cannot be found, or has become incapable of giving evidence, or cannot be called as a witness without an amount of delay or expense which the Court regards as unreasonable: Provided also that, if oral evidence refers to the existence or condition of any material thing other than a document, the Court may, if it thinks fit, require the production of such material thing for its inspection.

धारा – 60 :- मौखिक साक्ष्य प्रत्यक्ष होना चाहिए-

मौखिक साक्ष्य, समस्त अवस्थाओं में चाहे वे कैसी ही हो प्रत्यक्ष ही होगा, अर्थात-यदि वह किसी देख जा सकने वाले तथ्य के बारे में है, तो वह ऐसे साक्षी का ही साक्ष्य होगा जो कहता है कि उसने उसे देखा; यदि वह किसी से ना सकने वाले तथ्य के बारे में है, तो वह ऐसे साक्षी का ही साक्ष्य होगा जो कहता है कि उसने सुना; यदि वह किसी ऐसे तथ्य के बारे में है जिसका किसी अन्य इन्द्रिय द्वारा या किसी अन्य रीति से बोध हो सकता था, तो वह ऐसे साक्षी का ही साक्ष्य होगा जो कहता है कि उसने उसका बोध इस इन्द्रिय द्वारा या उस रीति से किया;यदि वह किसी राय के, या उन आधारों के, जिन पर राय आधारित है, बारे में है, तो वह उस व्यक्ति का ही साक्ष्य होगा जो वह राय उन आधारों पर धारण करता है:परन्तु विशेषज्ञों की राय, जो सामान्यतः बिक्री के लिए प्रस्थापित की जाने वाली किसी पुस्तक में अभिव्यक्त है, और वे आधार जिन पर ऐसी रायें धारित हैं, यदि रचयिता मर गया है, या वह तिमल नहीं सकात है। या वह साक्ष्य देने के लिए असमर्थ हो गया है या उसे अपने विलंब या व्यय के बिना जितना न्यायालय अयुक्तियुक्त समझता है, साक्षी के रूप में बुलाया नहीं जा सकती हो, ऐसी पुस्तकों को पेश करके साबित किए जा सकेंगे परन्तु यह भी कि यदि मौखिक साक्ष्य दस्तावेज से भिन्न किसी भौतिक चीज के अस्तित्व या दशा के बारे में है, तो न्यायालय, यदि वह ठीक समझे, ऐसी भौतिक चीज का अपने निरीक्षण अर्थ पेश किया जाना अपेक्षित कर सकेगा।

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-27:- How much of information received from accused may be proved.

Provided that, when any fact is deposed as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved.

धारा 27:- अभियुक्त से प्राप्त जानकारी में से कितनी साबित की जा सकेगी-

परन्तु जब किसी तथ्य के बारे में यह अभिसाक्ष्य दिया जाता है कि किसी अपराध के अभियुक्त व्यक्ति से, जो पुलिस ऑफिसर की अभिरक्षा में हो, प्राप्त जानकारी के परिणामस्वरूप उसे पता चला है, तब ऐसी जानकारी में से, उतनी चाहे वह संस्वीकृति की कोटि में आती हो या नहीं, जितनी एतद्द्वारा पता चले हुए तथ्य से स्पष्टतया सम्बन्धित की जा सकेगी।

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 62:- Primary evidence. — Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court.

Explanation 1. — Where a document is executed in several parts, each part is primary evidence of the document; Where a document is executed in counterpart, each counterpart being executed by one or some of the parties only, each counterpart is primary evidence as against the parties executing it.

Explanation 2. — Where a number of documents are all made by one uniform process, as in the case of printing, lithography, or photography, each is primary evidence of the contents of the rest; but, where they are all copies of a common original, they are not primary evidence of the contents of the original.

Illustration: A person is shown to have been in possession of a number of placards, all printed at one time from one original. Any one of the placards is primary evidence of the contents of any other, but no one of them is primary evidence of the contents of the original.

धारा 62.प्राथमिक साक्ष्य – प्राथमिक साक्ष्य कस न्यायालय के निरीक्षण के लिए पेश की गई दस्तावेज स्वयं अभिप्रेत है।

स्पष्टीकरण 1 – जहां कि कोई दस्तावेज कई मूल प्रतियों में निष्पादित है, वहां हर एक मूल प्रति उस दस्तावेज का प्राथमिक साक्ष्य है।जहां कि कोई दस्तावेज प्रतिलेख में निष्पादित है और हर एक प्रतिलेख पक्षकारों में से केवल एक पक्षकार या कुछ पक्षकारों द्वारा निष्पादित किया गया है, वहां हर एक प्रतिलेख उन पक्षकारों के विरुद्ध, उन्होंने उसका निष्पादन किया है, प्राथमिक साक्ष्य है।

स्पष्टीकरण 2 – जहां कि अनेक दस्तावेजें एकरूपात्मक प्रक्रिया द्वारा बनाई गई हैं, जैसा कि मुद्रण, शिलामुद्रण या फोटो-चित्रण में होता है, वहां उनमें से हर एक शेष सब कि अन्तर्वस्तु का प्राथमिक साक्ष्य है, किन्तु जहां कि वे सब किसी सामसन्य मुल की प्रतियां है वहां वे मुल की अन्तर्वस्तु का प्राथमिक साक्ष्य नहीं है।

दृष्टान्त – यह दर्शित किया जाता है। कि एक ही समय एक ही मूल से मुद्रित अनेक पैन कार्ड किसी व्यक्ति के कब्जे में रखे हैं। इन प्ले कार्डों में से कोई भी एक अन्य किसी की भी अंतर्वस्तु का प्राथमिक साक्ष्य है किन्तु उनमें से कोई भी मूल की अंतर्वस्तु का प्राथमिक साक्ष्य नहीं 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 63 Secondary evidence.—Secondary evidence means and includes—

(1) Certified copies given under the provisions hereinafter contained 1;1;”

(2) Copies made from the original by mechanical processes which in themselves insure the accuracy of the copy, and copies compared with such copies;

(3) Copies made from or compared with the original;

(4) Counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not execute them;

(5) Oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself seen it.

Illustration:

(a) A photograph of an original is secondary evidence of its contents, though the two have not been compared, if it is proved that the thing photographed was the original.

(b) A copy compared with a copy of a letter made by a copying machine is secondary evidence of the contents of the letter, if it is shown that the copy made by the copying machine was made from the original.

(c) A copy transcribed from a copy, but afterwards compared with the original, is secondary evidence; but the copy not so compared is not secondary evidence of the original, although the copy from which it was transcribed was compared with the original.

(d) Neither an oral account of a copy compared with the original, nor an oral account of a photograph or machine-copy of the original, is secondary evidence of the original.

धारा-63. द्वितीयक साक्ष्य – द्वितीयक साक्ष्य से अभिप्रेत है और उसके अन्तर्गत आते हैं-

(1) एतस्मिन्प्श्चात अन्तर्विष्ट उपबन्धों के अधीन दी हुई प्रमाणित प्रतियां;

(2) मूल से ऐसी यांत्रिक प्रक्रियाओं द्वारा, जो प्रक्रियाएं स्वयं ही प्रति का शुद्धता सुनिश्चित करती हैं, बनाई गई प्रतियां तथा ऐसी प्रजातियों से तुलना की हुई प्रतिलिपि;

(3) मूल से बनाई गई या तुलना की गई प्रतियां;

(4) उन पक्षकारों के विरुद्ध, जिन्होंने उन्हें निष्पादित नहीं किया है, दस्तावेजों के प्रतिलेख;

(5) किसी दस्तावेज की अंतर्वस्तु का उस व्यक्ति द्वारा, जिसने सबसे उसे देखा है, दिया हुआ मौखिक वृत्तान्त।

दृष्टान्त-

(क) किसी मूल का फोटोचित्र, यद्यपि दोनों की तुलना न की गई हो तथापि यदि ये साबित किया जाता है कि फोटोचित्र वस्तु मूल थी, उस मूल की अन्तर्वस्तु का द्वितीयक साक्ष्य है।

(ख) किसी पत्र की वह प्रति, जिसकी तलना उस पत्र की, उस प्रति से कर ली गई है जो प्रतिलिपि-यंत्र द्वारा तैयार की गई है, उस पत्र की अन्तर्वस्तु का द्वितीयक साक्ष्य है, यदि यह दर्शित कर दिया जाता है कि प्रतिलिपि-यंत्र द्वारा तैयार की गई प्रति मूल से बनाई गई थी।

(ग) प्रति की नकल करके तैयार की गई किन्तु तत्पश्चात् मूल से तुलना की हुई प्रतिलिपि द्वितीयक साक्ष्य है, किन्तु इस प्रकार तुलना नहीं की हुई प्रति मूल का द्वितीयक साक्ष्य नहीं है, यद्यपि उस प्रति की, जिससे वह नकल की गई है, मूल से तुलना की गई थी।

(घ) न तो मूल से तुलनाकृत प्रति का मौखिक वृत्तान्त और न मूल के किसी फांेटोचित्र या यन्त्रकृत प्रति का मौखिक वृत्तान्त मूल का द्वितीयक साक्ष्य हैं।

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.