Section 60 of IEA : Section 60: Oral evidence must be direct.

Explanation using Example

Example 1:

Scenario: A car accident at a busy intersection.

Situation: Ramesh is a witness to a car accident at a busy intersection. He saw a red car run a red light and hit a blue car that was crossing the intersection legally.

Application of Section 60:

• Ramesh's testimony in court must be direct. He must state that he saw the red car run the red light and hit the blue car.
• If Ramesh only heard the crash but did not see it, his testimony about the visual aspects of the accident would not be admissible. Instead, he could only testify about what he heard, such as the sound of the crash.

Example 2:

Scenario: A dispute over a verbal contract.

Situation: Priya and Anil had a verbal agreement where Anil promised to sell his bike to Priya for ₹20,000. Priya claims that Anil later refused to sell the bike after she arranged the money.

Application of Section 60:

• Priya's testimony must be direct. She must state that she heard Anil promise to sell the bike for ₹20,000.
• If Priya's friend, Suman, was present during the conversation, Suman can also provide direct oral evidence by stating that she heard Anil make the promise.
• If Priya only heard about the agreement from someone else who was not present, that testimony would not be considered direct and thus not admissible.

Example 3:

Scenario: Identification of a stolen item.

Situation: A gold necklace was stolen from Meera's house. Later, the police recovered a necklace and called Meera to identify it.

Application of Section 60:

• Meera's testimony must be direct. She must state that she saw the necklace and recognized it as her own.
• If Meera's neighbor, who had never seen the necklace before, tried to testify that the recovered necklace was Meera's based on what Meera told her, this would not be admissible as it is not direct evidence.
• If the court requires, the actual necklace can be produced in court for inspection to support Meera's testimony.

Example 4:

Scenario: Expert opinion in a medical malpractice case.

Situation: Dr. Sharma, a renowned surgeon, wrote a book on surgical procedures. In a medical malpractice case, the plaintiff wants to use Dr. Sharma's opinion from his book as evidence, but Dr. Sharma has passed away.

Application of Section 60:

• The plaintiff can produce Dr. Sharma's book as evidence of his expert opinion since Dr. Sharma is deceased.
• The court will consider the book as direct evidence of Dr. Sharma's opinion on the surgical procedure in question.
• If Dr. Sharma were alive and able to testify, he would need to provide direct oral evidence about his opinion and the grounds for it.