What is Section 60 of the evidence Act?

Asked by: Shayne Wisoky | Last update: February 8, 2026

Score: 4.2/5 (7 votes)

Section 60 of an Evidence Act generally addresses exceptions to the hearsay rule, allowing prior statements (representations) to be admitted not just to prove they were made, but also for the truth of what they assert, especially when relevant for non-hearsay purposes like forming the basis of expert opinions or in business records. While older Acts (like India's 1872 version) focus on making oral evidence direct (personal observation), modern statutes, such as Australia's Evidence Act 1995, use Section 60 to broaden hearsay exceptions, letting a doctor's patient history or a product label's information be admitted as proof of the facts stated, not just as background.

What is the 60 of Evidence Act?

Section 60 lays down that oral evidence must in all cases be direct and not heard from any other sourse. Where a witness gives evidence that he received information from other person and that person does not say about it, such evidence would be inadmissible being hearsay evidence.

What is Section 60 of the Crimes Ordinance?

A person who without lawful excuse destroys or damages any property belonging to another intending to destroy or damage it or being reckless as to whether it would be destroyed or damaged is liable to imprisonment for 10 years.

What are some examples of oral evidence?

Real-Life Example

Consider a criminal trial where a witness, Sarah, testifies in court about what she saw at the scene of a crime. Sarah's spoken testimony, given under oath, is considered oral evidence. She describes the events she witnessed, providing crucial information to the jury.

What are the exceptions to hearsay evidence?

The exceptions contained in Criminal Evidence Act, 2003 are statements made by persons who cannot be produced as witnesses, statements in business and other documents, specific inconsistent and previous statements of witnesses, expert-opinion, and accomplice's confession.

Indian Evidence Act || Oral Evidence - Sec 59 and 60 || Rule of Exclusion of Hearsay Evidence

18 related questions found

What are the five hearsay exceptions?

Rule 803. Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay

(1) Present Sense Impression. ...
(2) Excited Utterance. ...
(3) Then-Existing Mental, Emotional, or Physical Condition. ...
(4) Statement Made for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment. ...
(A) is made for — and is reasonably pertinent to — medical diagnosis or treatment; and.

What are the two main reasons why hearsay is generally inadmissible?

The primary reason for this rule of evidence in California criminal cases is that hearsay statements are not reliable enough to be accepted as valid evidence. Further, they are not made under oath and can't be subjected to cross-examination in court.

What is evidence that cannot be used in court?

Evidence not admissible in court typically includes illegally obtained evidence (violating the Fourth Amendment), hearsay (out-of-court statements used for their truth), irrelevant or speculative information, privileged communications (like psychotherapist-patient), and confessions obtained through coercion, with rules varying slightly by jurisdiction but generally focusing on reliability, legality, and relevance.

How do judges decide who is telling the truth?

The standard credibility instruction tells the fact-finder to consider the witness's strength of memory,ability in the described circumstances to see and hear,and the clarity with which he is able to recall events. Tone of voice,shades of expression,and gestures are also to be considered.

Can I see the evidence against me?

When the state files charges against you, it's safe to assume that prosecutors have evidence that implicates you and can be used against you at trial. All defendants have the right to access this evidence through what is known as the discovery process.

What is Section 60 of the criminal Justice Act?

A Section 60 is put in place if an Inspector or above believes that people will be: carrying weapons or. causing serious violence or. incidents involving serious violence MAY take place.

What is the 60G crimes act?

CRIMES ACT 1900 - SECT 60G

(1) A person who assaults, throws a missile at, stalks, harasses or intimidates a retail worker in the course of the worker's duty, although no actual bodily harm is caused to the worker, commits an offence. : Maximum penalty--imprisonment for 4 years.

Can you get in trouble for intimidating someone?

Usually, an individual intimidates others by deterring or coercing them to take an action they do not want to take. The intimidation may become a civil or criminal offense unless that behavior serves a “legitimate purpose.” See 18 U.S. Code § 1514.

What is the best evidence rule in the Evidence Act?

The evidence law of India regards the “Best Evidence Rule” as a principle guiding the Indian Evidence Act 1872. By Best Evidence Rule we mean that the secondary evidence won't be applicable when primary evidence exists.

How much evidence do you need to convict someone?

Further, California criminal law allows the prosecution to convict a defendant on circumstantial evidence alone. If direct evidence were always necessary for a conviction, a crime would need a direct eyewitness, or the guilty party would avoid criminal responsibility.

What are the 4 types of evidence?

The four main types of evidence, especially in legal and academic contexts, are Testimonial (spoken/written statements), Documentary (written records), Physical/Real (tangible items), and Demonstrative (visual aids like charts/diagrams). Other categorizations exist, like evidence for arguments (anecdotal, descriptive, correlational, causal) or textual evidence (quoting, paraphrasing).

What is the hardest case to win in court?

The hardest cases to win in court often involve high emotional stakes, like crimes against children or sexual assault, where jurors struggle with bias; complex, voluminous evidence, such as white-collar fraud; and defenses that challenge societal norms, like an insanity plea, which faces high scrutiny and conflicting expert testimony. Cases with weak physical evidence, uncooperative witnesses (like in sex crimes), or those involving unpopular defendants (e.g., child abusers) are particularly challenging for defense attorneys.

How to tell if someone is lying in court?

While not an exhaustive list, these verbal and non-verbal signs of deception are more common than some of the others we've seen.

Premise. ...
Verbal Indicators. ...
No Response/Non-Responsive. ...
Delayed Response. ...
Repeating the Question. ...
No Denial. ...
Overly Specific/Overly Vague. ...
Protest Statements.

What not to tell a judge?

You should not say anything sarcastic, interrupt the judge, lie, use slang, make personal attacks on others, guarantee outcomes, or speak about things not relevant to the case; instead, remain respectful, address the judge as "Your Honor," answer only the question asked, and be direct and truthful to maintain credibility.

Can screenshots of messages be used as evidence?

Yes, screenshots of messages can be used as evidence, but they are often considered weak or unreliable on their own because they can be easily edited, cropped, or taken out of context, making them difficult to authenticate; courts prefer original messages with complete metadata (dates, times, sender info) and often require extra proof, like testimony or forensic analysis, to confirm they are genuine.

What color do judges like to see in court?

Judges generally prefer neutral, conservative colors like navy, gray, black, and white, as these convey seriousness, respect, and professionalism, avoiding distractions in a formal court setting; bright colors, bold patterns, and overly casual attire should be avoided to show you're taking the proceedings seriously. While some suggest lighter, muted tones (like light blue) might leave a favorable impression, the key is sobriety and fitting in, not standing out.

What counts as illegal evidence?

First in line is illegally obtained evidence. If the police violated your rights to acquire the evidence, the court may rule it inadmissible. For example, if you were subjected to an unlawful search by law enforcement, the evidence they got cannot be used against you in court since it is against the law.

What is the 803 rule?

Main Principles of Federal Rule of Evidence 803

Rule 803 lays out exceptions to the general rule against hearsay evidence. These exceptions apply “regardless of whether the declarant is available as a witness.”

Can silence be considered hearsay?

Hearsay is not limited to oral statements. It includes conduct that can be viewed as assertive, most obviously with gestures like nodding or shaking of the head. Even silence in the face of an accusation can be viewed as a hearsay "statement" that constitutes an "admission" under certain circumstances.

What evidence is normally inadmissible?

Forms of evidence judges consider inadmissible include hearsay, prejudicial, improperly obtained or irrelevant items. For example, investigators use polygraph tests to determine whether a person is lying about the events of a case.