Preview

Exception Of Hearsay Evidence Under S

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1373 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Exception Of Hearsay Evidence Under S
Exception of Hearsay Evidence under S. 73A of the Evidence Act

Hearsay can be defined as the information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience. When submitted as evidence, such statements are called hearsay evidence. Hearsay evidence is generally not accepted in court. The general rule is that all relevant evidence are prima facie admissible, except for hearsay and opinion. However, under the Evidence Act 1950, there are basically some exceptions to the general rule regarding to hearsay evidence. Among the exceptions are sections 32, 33, 34, 35, 38 and 73A of the said Act1. Apart from the Evidence Act, there are also exceptions under Common law which is known as the Res Gestae principle.

Section 73A is basically dealing with the admissibility of documentary evidence in civil cases whereby subsection (1) stated that “ Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, in any civil proceedings where direct oral evidence of a fact would be admissible any statement made by a person in a document and tending to establish that fact shall, on production of the original document be admissible as evidence of that fact if the following conditions are satisfied: If the maker of the statement either had personal knowledge of the matters dealt with by the statement; or where the document in question is or forms part of a record purporting to be a continuous record, made the statement in the performance of a duty to record information supplied to him by a person who had, or might reasonably be supposed to have had, personal knowledge of those matters; and If the maker of the statement is called as a witness in the proceedings.” Provided that the condition that the maker of the statement shall be called as a witness need not be satisfied if he is dead, or unfit by reason of his bodily or mental condition to attend as a witness, or if he is beyond the seas and it is not

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    In chapter eight, we read about the confrontation clause and the exceptions to the hearsay…

    • 625 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    References: Colb, S.F. (2008 May 28). Hearsay, the Sixth Amendment, and Framers’ intent: The U.S.…

    • 655 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Federal Rules of Evidence

    • 3383 Words
    • 14 Pages

    As stated by Thayer J., (1889)“Evidence is any matter of fact which is furnished to a legal tribunal, otherwise than by reasoning or a reference to what is noticed without proof, as the basis of inference in ascertaining some other matter of fact.” Admissible evidence is relevant. Testimony that is direct personal knowledge or observation and that if true proves a fact without inference or presumption. Documentary evidence (e.g., a written contract, a deed) must be authenticated before the evidence is admissible unless, there is no question on the authenticity or the originals are lost, destroyed or made unattainable. Secondary evidence should be notarized to offer authenticity of the original document if needed. Tangible evidence is physical evidence that is either real (e.g. a murder weapon) or demonstrative (e.g. showing the type of motion used when striking a victim), or illustrative (e.g. models or charts).…

    • 3383 Words
    • 14 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    33. The facts that constitute inadmissibility under sections 34 to 37 include facts arising from omissions and, unless otherwise provided, include facts for which there are reasonable grounds to believe that they have occurred, are occurring or may occur.…

    • 1839 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Stages of a Criminal Trial

    • 2709 Words
    • 11 Pages

    Circumstantial evidence is indirect. It requires the judge or jury to make inferences and to draw conclusions. At a murder trial, for example, a person who heard gunshots and moments later saw someone run by with a smoking gun in hand might testify to those facts. Even without an eyewitness to the actual homicide, the jury might conclude that the person seen with the gun was the one who pulled the trigger and committed the crime. Circumstantial evidence is sufficient to produce a conviction in a criminal trial. In fact, some prosecuting attorneys prefer to work entirely with circumstantial evidence, weaving a tapestry of the criminal act into their arguments to the jury.…

    • 2709 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Justice Dickson’s interpretation of the s.8 of the Charter is best viewed as obiter dicta that needs to be taken into consideration for similar cases. La Forest J. provided that “[g]overments at all levels have in recent years recognized [the importance of protecting information] and have devised rules and regulations to restrict the uses of information collected by them to those for which it was obtained” (pg.…

    • 767 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hearsay evidence is circumstantial evidence because it is not direct. Direct evidence is a testimony of an eyewitness. Since the person stating the evidence saw nothing, but only heard his or her mom state that it was Bubba.…

    • 1214 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Question 1. Did Officer Smith have reasonable suspicion to make the initial stop of this vehicle?…

    • 1643 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Boerum Case Study

    • 4801 Words
    • 20 Pages

    § 3731, appealing the district court's ruling against the Government on the motion in limine and the motion to quash the subpoena duces tecum. (R. at 38). The court affirmed the district court's decision, ruling, in part, that the statements fail as a matter of law to qualify as excited utterances. (R. at 43). The Fourteenth Circuit also found the statements to be barred by the Confrontation Clause under Crawford v. Washington. (R. at 45). The court further upheld the district court's decision to quash the subpoena duces tecum, finding that Boyd v. United States still governed with respect to the Fifth Amendment's Self-Incrimination Clause. (R. at 49). Accordingly, the court found that the compelled production of Respondent's diary was unconstitutional. (R. at 48).…

    • 4801 Words
    • 20 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Out Of Court Hearsay

    • 141 Words
    • 1 Page

    As discussed in class a simple definition of hearsay would be an out of court statement in which the declarant does not testify in an effort to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In other words if someone committed a crime and came to me and told me I would not be allowed to testify to that in court because it would be considered hearsay. There has to be a way to prove that the facts are the truth of the matter. The court defines hearsay as being a statement made out of court, which is offered in court as evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted. The hearsay rule was developed in order to prevent miscarriage of just justice in result of accepted statement of an untested and unsworn statements from and individual not present in…

    • 141 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Defendants are without sufficient information to admit or deny the allegations in Paragraphs 6, 7, 8, 10, 17, 20, 22, 33, 55, 60, 63, 68, and 71, and places Plaintiff to its strict proof thereof.…

    • 542 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hearsay Bar Case Study

    • 91 Words
    • 1 Page

    Well it was found that even if the hearsay bar is split in half, quarter or twelfth the density will be the same because, there will be the same amount of compactness. There will be the same amount of room in every single piece even if the bar is cut into an eighteenth. The density will not change even if it's a whole or half. Yes it does have less volume than a whole but that doesn't affect how dense an object is. In this case it is a hershey…

    • 91 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Miranda vs Arizona

    • 1766 Words
    • 8 Pages

    “This Court has undertaken to review the voluntariness of statements obtained by police in state cases since Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U. S. 278 (1936). (Davis v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 (1966))…

    • 1766 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hcr Week 8 Legal Terms

    • 327 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Res gestae: means thing done or that hearsay evidence (something that someone heard someone else say) can be used in court…

    • 327 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Evidence Act, Cap E14, Laws of the. Federation of Nigeria (LFN), 2004 Aguda, Akinola, The law of Evidence, Ibadan, Spectrum Books Limited, 1966 Udemezue S, Expert Witness in Law of Evidence, Nigerian Law School (unpub) 2009 PAUL W. GRIMM, CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Ratio Decidendi in Lorraine v Markel Am Ins Co 241 FRD 534 (D.Md. 2007)…

    • 2122 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Better Essays