Sec 33, 40 to 43 evidence act 

Thank you g

Thank you

Welcome g

Welcome g

RU-vid per law Ka no. 1 channel hai sir ka... thank you sir 🙏

Thank u g

Thank you g, and same to you

Welcome g

Sir during pre evidence examination of complaint and his witnesses are examined but I don't understand who cross examined them when accused has not so far summoned by the court. So condition as to the right of cross examination is fulfilled. Then how is the statement in previous proceeding relevant? Please explain.

@@furqanmohd6225 It seems, in a complaint case Court's prima facie satisfaction on the statement made by complainant and it's witness, make him initiate proceeding against accused..But like statement u/s 161 crpc (police investigation/report), such statements as made prior to accused gets summoned are relevant ( since having some basic value ) as based on the same premise the case got structured..But it does not mean that after accused come into picture he would not be allowed to cross examine such witness/ facts, (as happens in statement u/s 161 crpc)

Will prepared and give

Did the first judgment says that C is A's wife, it simply convicted B for committing adultery and in the same case B took the defence that C is not A's wife. And in the subsequent case the issue is whether C is A's wife. This fact can't be proved by giving the judgment in which B was convinced as the marriage is to be proved through proper evidence

First judgment was passed in which person was convicted for adultery, Bcz in those cases marriage is not needed to be proved strictly as per the HMA.

My pleasure to serve the law community.

Mam, In section 33 there is a PROVISO that the ADVERSE PARTY IN THE FIRST PROCEEDING HAD THE RIGHT AND OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE..... SO the preliminary evidence which is rendered in complaint cases before summoning, whether that statement can be read if during post charge evidence witness is unavailable (I understand that u had very kindly illustrated it in the video).... BUT the thing which I could not grip is that "WHEN PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE IS NOT CROSS EXAMINED, THEN WHETHER THESE STATEMENTS CAN BE READ?????? " AS FAR AS I COULD GUESS THAT HIS SOLE STATEMENT IN HIS ABSENCE WOULD BE LESS RELIABLE IF THERE IS NO OTHER EVIDENCE TO CORROBORATE HIS/HER STATEMENT "...... Would wait for your feedback Sir or if any fellow aspirant is able to comment, it would be grateful.

@@amanjatinder5245 actually...my question was same as yours and sir ne answer bhi diya h mere comment par...aap check krskte haii

No, judgments can only be used under section 40 to 43

Harpreet Singh Kahlon ...sir can you tell us .. admission investigation start hone se phle di jati h or confession during the investigation ..? Or agr investigation ke bech me koi 3rd person statement de rha h to kya vo admission h ..? But accused statement investigation se phle police officer ke samne dega to vo relevant hogi or admissible b ..? Dipak bhai v Gujarat state case .. kya ye sari chiz sir shi h jisse mere points clear ho ske😇

Confession before trial that means before charge, admission at any time, plead guilty after charge that means during trial

Harpreet Singh Kahlon ... sir seriously I’m shocked 🙈🙈kuch b kh lo sir aapka fast reply bhut satisfaction de deta h or seriously you are providing better than an institute ..💫sir thanks for your effort I wish that you’ll achieve what you want ..thanks once again sir 😇

Welcome g

Welcome g

Not recorded,

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 Sir when we get those lectures whose are left?

For adultery IPC is applicable according to example...example is saying A prosecutes B...which means it is a matter decided by criminal court and not matrimonial court so sec. 41 is not applicable. In adultery case fact in issue is whether B has committed adultry with the wife of A. On the other hand the fact in issue is whether marriage between B and C has taken place or not....So 1 is criminal matter other is matrimonial matter and issues in both these cases are different.

Mam, In section 33 there is a PROVISO that the ADVERSE PARTY IN THE FIRST PROCEEDING HAD THE RIGHT AND OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE..... SO the preliminary evidence which is rendered in complaint cases before summoning, whether that statement can be read if during post charge evidence witness is unavailable (I understand that u had very kindly illustrated it in the video).... BUT the thing which I could not grip is that "WHEN PRELIMINARY EVIDENCE IS NOT CROSS EXAMINED, THEN WHETHER THESE STATEMENTS CAN BE READ?????? " AS FAR AS I COULD GUESS THAT HIS SOLE STATEMENT IN HIS ABSENCE WOULD BE LESS RELIABLE IF THERE IS NO OTHER EVIDENCE TO CORROBORATE HIS/HER STATEMENT "...... Would wait for your feedback Mam or if any fellow aspirant is able to comment, it would be grateful. I have also put this comment/query in the main page of this link as well🙏🙏

@@amanjatinder5245 even if that witness was not cross examined ...it will be relevant but that party should had the opportunity earlier

Judgment in which any character was declared or denied is relevant u/s 41

Rem means against the whole world, personam means against the person

While conducting the inquiry under section 176.

Section 35 SRA is a general provision and Section 41 IEA is only talking about those judgements,decree or order which are related to matrimonial, probate, admirality or insolvancy courts. These matters are considered to be the matters of social concern.

Yes the aggrieved party can approach uoto higher court to get justice

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 sir lekin apne sec 40 me kaha jo previous judgement show karde court me phir vhi mani jaegi

I m taking about general ryt.

To understand the sec 40 plz watch vedio on resjudicata in Cpc playlist

Yes it apply to both

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 thank you sir....

Welcome g

sir plz update

Same doubt here too but i think nahi hoga applicable kyunki right to cross hoti hi nhi 200 crpc me yaha sir se thodi glti hogyi h lgta

Welcome g

No

It is recorded with intent to come to the conclusion whether a Prima facie case is made out against the accused to summon him for charge

2 times

Me khudh nahi ja saka Canada issue😊

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 sir aap th ADA ho aapne kya krna jaake canada life as an ADA is rewarding enough k nahi sir? M also aspirant of ADA

I have skipped as it normally comes in pre exam with rare chance, but not so important for main exam.

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 ohkk sirr😊🤗thnx for uhr quick response😍

Yes

Thank you ji

Generally no, but sometimes advocates moves an application for additional evidence in that case court in the end of justice may allow to record the evidence and can also remand back the case

I think it's not so difficult so I thought that student can do it themselves, but will do if u want

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 thank you sir, i will try those sections by myself. Sir, would you please publish a book including your notes?

Yes, already typed and I m going to recheck those notes, after that I will provide u

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 Sir, Eagerly waiting for the book.

Acctually I mean meaning

Competent court means a court has the all jurisdiction(Territorial and pecuinary) to try a suit, And incompetent court means lack of jurisdiction or erroneous jurisdiction

And also regarding the subject matter

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 yes sir

It's true but opposite council with permission put questions in order to rebut the version of complainant

Will UPLAODED the missing vedios in the last week of December

Yes it's the part of evidence act if fall under section 40 to 43

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 please make a video

Got it

All judgments r irrelevant unless judgments r itself fact in issue. A is charged with theft and with having been previously convicted of theft. The previous conviction is relevant as a fact in issue, so here previous judgment is relevant

What??

It's so simple if no attesting witnesses r found than u just prove their handwriting/signature by producing the handwriting of witnesses or documents bearing their signature

Welcome g