send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Type your modal answer and submitt for approval
‘A’ leisurely walks down from a place with injuries on his person and when intervened and asked by a bystander he says that ‘B’ has assaulted him. This would amount to –
A complaint under section 8
A statement under section 8 which is inadmissible
oral statement
None of the above
- When ‘A’ states to a bystander that ‘B’ has assaulted him, this is an oral statement made shortly after the incident.
- Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with motive, preparation, and conduct, and includes statements that explain conduct under investigation.
- Such a spontaneous statement by A can actually be considered relevant under section 8, as it explains A’s conduct and is also part of the res gestae (things done, immediate facts) if made at or near the time of the occurrence.
- Therefore, it is not necessarily inadmissible—the law tends to treat such statements as admissible to explain actions or reactions immediately after the event.
- Option 3: Oral statement is too generic and does not reference legal relevance.
- Option 2: A statement under section 8 which is inadmissible is not accurate because these statements are generally admissible under section 8 if they explain relevant conduct.
- Option 1: A complaint under section 8 is not accurate because a complaint usually refers to a formal, often written, report to authorities.
- Option 4: None of the above does not apply since option 2 is close but not accurate, and option 3 is too broad.
Option 1: A complaint under section 8 (Correct Answer)
Such a statement is considered relevant under section 8 as conduct, but is not the same as a formal "complaint." Among the given options, the closest is that it's a statement under section 8 (relevant and admissible to explain conduct).
By: santosh ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses