Mobile View
Main Search Advanced Search Disclaimer
Citedby 103 docs - [View All]
Raja Sriniwas Prasad Singh vs S.D.O. And Anr. on 21 November, 1961
Fatima Tile Works And Another vs Sudarsan Trading Co. Ltd. And ... on 12 April, 1991
State Of Kerala vs Mathew ( M. M. ) And Anr on 18 August, 1978
Vijatabai & Ors vs Shriram Tukaram & Ors on 20 November, 1998
Vijatabai & Ors vs Shriram Tukaram & Ors on 20 November, 1998

[Complete Act]
Central Government Act
Section 46 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
46. Facts bearing upon opinions of experts.—Facts not otherwise relevant, are relevant if they support or are inconsistent with the opinions of experts, when such opinions are relevant. Illustrations
(a) The question is, whether A was poisoned by a certain poison. The fact that other persons, who were poisoned by that person, exhibited certain symptoms which experts affirm or deny to be the symptoms of that poison, is relevant.
(b) The question is, whether an obstruction to a harbour is caused by a certain sea-wall. The fact that other harbours similarly situated in other respects, but where there were no such sea-walls, began to be obstructed at about the same time, is relevant. COMMENTS tc "COMMENTS" Admissibility The science of identification of footprints is not a fully developed science and therefore if in a given case, evidence relating to the same is found satisfactory it may be used only to reinforce the conclusions as to the identity of a culprit already arrived at on the basis of other evidence; Mohd. Aman v. State of Rajasthan, (1997) 4 Supreme 635.