Oral evidence is the evidence which is confined to words spoken by mouth. Oral evidence, if worthy of credit, is sufficient without documentary evidence to prove a fact or title. Where a fact may be proved by oral evidence is not necessary that the statement of the witness should be oral. Any method of communicating thought which the circumstances of the case or the physical condition of the witness demand may, in the discretion of the Court, be employed. Thus, a deaf may testify by signs or by writing. Section 59 of the Indian Evidence   bnA0jHct, 1872 says about proof of facts by oral evidence. It states that all facts. except the (contents of documents or electronic records) contents of documents, may be provided by oral evidence.

All the facts except the contents of documents or electronic records may be proved by oral evidence. This section lays down that where written documents exists, they shall be produced as being the best evidence of their own contents and and no oral evidence can be adduced to prove as to what is wrong in the document. The rules of leading evidence may be classified under three heads   :

1. Dealing with the probative value of specific facts
2. Including artificial rules which do not profess to define probative value but yet aim at increasing or safeguarding it
3. Covering all those rules which rest on extrinsic policies irrespective of probative value.

The first group of rules attempts to define for legal purposes, the probative value which suffices to entitle, a fact to be regarded as evidential. Here the law is concerned with the rules of logic and interference as applied in practical experience. The second group of rules, lays down auxiliary test and safeguard, usually for particular kinds of facts, over and above the required minimum probative value. The hearsay rule, the rules of quantity, the rules of oath and a dozen other belong to this group. The third group is for exclusion of certain kinds of facts on extrinsic policies which override the policy of ascertaining the truth by all available means. These rules concede that the evidence in question has all the probative value that can be required but yet exclude it because its admission would injure some other cause more than it would help the cause of truth and because the avoidance of that injury is considered of more consequence than the possible harm to the cause of truth.

There are mainly two types of evidence that is direct and hearsay evidence. It is stated under section 60 of Indian Evidence Act that oral evidence must be direct.

Reference:

1. Principles of the Law Of Evidence – Dr. Avtar Singh – Central Law Publications
2. https://indianlegalsolution.com

Aishwarya Says:

I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAME, DO LET ME KNOW.

Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter  Youtube and Instagram.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at secondinnings.hr@gmail.com

In the year 2021, we wrote about 1000 Inspirational Women In India, in the year 2022, we would be featuring 5000 Start Up Stories.