Several persons of one party drove several cattle belonging to the deceased to the cattle pond Two o...........

Indian Evidence Act (IEA) 1872 Admission and Rejection of Evidence

Several persons of one party drove several cattle belonging to the deceased to the cattle pond. Two of them made a statement to the police that the cattle of the deceased damaged their crops. While they were bringing the cattle to the pond, the deceased interfered with the carrying of the cattle and so their was a fight which caused death of the deceased. The statement to the police –

Was not admissible in evidence as it was a mere complaint and not an admission of guilt

Was admissible in evidence as confession

Was only an exculpatory statement of the circumstances under which the cattle had been seized

Both (a) and (c)

छोटे Courses बड़े Results

Master Admission and Rejection of Evidence

Prepare through Micro-courses

Try Now

Explanation:

- Option 1: A statement made to the police that merely reports an incident, like a complaint of crop damage, is generally not admissible as it's not an admission of guilt.

- Option 2: For a statement to be admissible as a confession, it should acknowledge guilt directly, which this statement does not do.

- Option 3: The statement might explain the circumstances, thus focusing on justification rather than acknowledgment of guilt, hence could be seen as exculpatory.

- Option 4: Combines elements of both Options 1 and 3, viewing the statement as partly a complaint and partly a contextual explanation.

Option 4 is the correct answer.