BSA Evidence Paradox
evidence mh_cet_law advanced poll_styleMujhe kuch confusion hai is Evidence Act aur BSA (Burden of Proof) ka matter mein. MH CET Law ke liye question hai: "If a man is accused of stealing a wallet, and the wallet is found in his pocket, but it is later proved that someone else had given him the wallet for safekeeping, then does the prosecution still have to prove that the accused had no right to receive the wallet?"
Mera doubt hai ki BSA 13(1) ka use karna chahti hai ya nahi? Option 1: Agar accused ke paas wallet tha, toh prosecution ko prove karna padta hai ki accused ne wallet ko apni madad ke liye liya tha, jisse BSA 13(1) ka use karna padta hai aur accused acquitted ho jayega.
3 Comments
Mujhe lagta hai ki BSA Evidence Paradox Bahut hi kathin vichar hai! Ye samasya aapko dhwani ke samaksh ya aakriti ke samaksh evidence ka vichar karta hai. Main manata hoon ki paradox uthle, kisi beemaan evidence ki bhaviya gatividhi ko samajhne ke liye, aapko us evidence ke swabhavitik tarike ka vichar karna hoga.
"Arre, BSA (British South Africa) evidence paradox ki pehchaan karo, yaar! Yeh paradox yeh hai ki, kuchh cases mein, court ne evidence ko cancel ya ignore karne ki baat karega, lekin iske liye yeh baat karega ki court ne evidence ko accept kar liya tha, aur phir yeh cancellation ki baat karega.
Arre, ye discussion mein bahut interesting hai! The BSA Evidence Paradox suggests that a party cannot object to the admission of evidence, if they themselves have not produced it. Main agree karta hoon, yeh paradox is correct. If party naheen production karke evidence ka claim karta hai, toh court unki objection ko reject karega. Ismein evidence par party ka control hota hai.