Explanation of Section 7 of Evidence Act is important in order to understand the relevancy of Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue
Explanation of Section 7 of Evidence Act
- Section – 7 is based on the doctrine of induction as the relevancy of facts is to be determined by human experience. What has been the effect of a particular cause and what has been the constant cause of a particular effect in the past will be the same in the future.
Occasion
- Occasion means the circumstances in which the event has occurred. Evidence of such circumstances is allowed to be given.
- For example
- In the case of R v. Richardson , where a person was charged with the rape and murder of a girl , the fact that the girl was alone in her cottage at the time of her murder is relevant , because it provided the occasion in which the crime happened
Cause
- Facts that forms the cause of facts in issue are relevant. Cause often explains why a particular act was done.
- For example
- A is charged with the offence of criminal misappropriation of funds from a bank. The fact A was hugely in debt at the time of committing the crime is a relevant fact because it indicates a possible cause for the commission of the crime.
Effect
- Effect is the ultimate result of an act done and every act causes some effects that leads to some other happening .
- The effect throws light on happening and nature of act done
- Evidence of foot prints are admissible under this section – Sadik v. Emperor
- Court in the case of Chandra Gopal v. State (1955) that the injuries inflicted on the accused of riot case is relevant to show that they took part in riot
Opportunity
- Circumstances which provide an opportunity for the happening of a fact in issue are relevant
- For example
- A person has to carve out an opportunity for himself to do the act in question.
- The evidence of the woman who was alone in the house on particular day was held admissible to show that if afforded an opportunity to the accused to commit rape is relevant under section 7 of the act.
Last Seen theory
Explanation of Section 7 of Evidence Act
- According to this theory, if a person is the last seen with the deceased just before his death or within a reasonable period of his death that no other person could have intervened in between them then the presumption can be taken that he (the person who was last seen) is the author of the crime.
- This theory derives its relevance from Section 7 of the Indian Evidence Act which is called the “Doctrine of Inductive Logic” in which it is stated that if any fact related to the occasion, cause, or effect lead to the circumstance in which that thing occurred or it provided an opportunity for the occurrence of that thing then those facts will be relevant. And in the last seen theory also the person who was the last present with the victim would have a reasonable opportunity to commit the crime.
Last Seen theory read with Sec – 114
- This presumption of fact is taken under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act under which the court can presume that certain facts exist if some other facts are proved to be existing in the cases of natural events, human conduct, and public and private business
- For instance, if A was the last person seen with B just before his murder then it can be presumed that A murdered B under this theory because A had adequate opportunity to commit the crime. But this presumption is not considered as conclusive proof for the guilt of the person and these presumptions are rebuttable by the accused. It only shifts the onus on the person to prove that he is innocent which is an exception in the criminal law as the burden of proving the guilt of the accused is on prosecution.
No comment