S
Sahaj Vidhi
Delhi APO 2005

Match List I with List II and select the correct answer using the code given below the list: List I A. Noor Mohd. v. Imtiaz Ahmad B. Pratap Singh v. State of Punjab C. Sardual Singh v. State of Bombay D. Raghunath v. State of U.P. List II

  1. Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act
  2. Section 7 of the Indian. Evidence Act
  3. Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act
  4. Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act
Verified Answer
A. A-1, B-2, C-3, D-4
B. A-3, B-4, C-1, D-2
C. A-1, B-4, C-3, D-2
D. A-3, B-2, C-1, D-4

Explanation:

The correct matches are: - A. Noor Mohd. v. Imtiaz Ahmad: This case is a prominent example discussing the application of Section 6 (Res Gestae) of the Indian Evidence Act, dealing with facts forming part of the same transaction. - B. Pratap Singh v. State of Punjab: This case is often cited in the context of Section 7 of the Indian Evidence Act, which deals with facts that are the occasion, cause, or effect of facts in issue. - C. Sardual Singh v. State of Bombay: This case is a significant precedent for understanding Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act, which covers motive, preparation, and previous or subsequent conduct. - D. Raghunath v. State of U.P.: This case is relevant to Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, which defines 'admission'.