Sarita works in a call centre where she has to work in odd hours. She reaches the office around 10.00 p.m. every night and gets back home around 6.00 a.m. in the morning. Her office has arranged for transport service so that she and other employees like her can be safely picked up and dropped back. On 01.03.2012, she received a call at around 3.30 a.m. from her home that her mother is seriously ill. Though the transport service would have taken her back around 5.30 a.m., Sarita decided to leave at once and borrowed a two wheeler from a friend for the same purpose. On her way back on roads which were mostly lonely, she was confronted by a gang of drunk’ hooligans who beat her up severely and ravished her in their car and then threw her off on the road.

Her colleagues spotted her when they were getting back from office in the company car around 5.50 a.m. They were horrified at the scene of a bleeding Sarita lying helplessly on the road. They picked her up and took her to the hospital. Some of her colleagues suggested that Sarita must first go to the police but Sarita did not want to register a complaint fearing a protracted legal proceeding which would put her to public humiliation. She mentioned the identity of one of the perpetrators as Rajesh who works in the office opposite to the call centre. In the hospital, Sarita breathed her last around 6.00 p.m. the same evening. Enraged at the whole event, couple of her friends informed the police of the incident pursuant to which Rajesh was apprehended and sent for trial.

• Under which provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, the statements made by Sarita to her colleagues in the car may be relevant?
• Under which provision of the Indian Evidence Act, the statements made by Sarita to her colleagues in the car will not be relevant?     (20 Marks)