Home › CS Executive › jurisprudence › Indian Evidence Act 1872 › Under **Section 45** of the Indian Evidence Act,…
Under **Section 45** of the Indian Evidence Act, the opinion of an expert is relevant upon a point of:
A{'text': 'Foreign law, science, art, identity of handwriting, or finger impressions', 'label': 'A'}
B{'text': 'Indian common law, parliamentary procedure, art history, and the identity of any accused person in any criminal trial under any law in force', 'label': 'B'}
C{'text': 'Indian customary law, classical literature, music theory, and the identity of any accused person in any criminal trial under any law in force', 'label': 'C'}
D{'text': 'Indian Constitution, statutory interpretation, philosophy of law, and the identity of any accused person in any criminal trial under any law in force', 'label': 'D'}
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: A. {'text': 'Foreign law, science, art, identity of handwriting, or finger impressions', 'label': 'A'}
1. Section 45 of the Indian Evidence Act is the **expert opinion** provision.
2. The lesson lists the five matters on which expert opinion is relevant: (a) **foreign law**; (b) **science**; (c) **art**; (d) **identity of handwriting**; (e) **finger impression** / special knowledge of the subject of enquiry.
3. The function of drawing inferences from facts is otherwise a judicial function for the Court.
4. Section 45A (added in 2000) makes opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence under Section 79A of the IT Act also relevant.
_Source: ICSI CS Executive Paper 1 — Jurisprudence, Interpretation & General Laws, Lesson 11 (Indian Evidence Act, 1872), pp. 251-272._
Related questions
Lesson 11 explains the difference between **confession and admission**. Which statement isAccording to the lesson, the distinction between **relevancy and admissibility** under theLesson 11 explains the distinction between **logical relevancy** and **legal relevancy**. Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act allows certain **statements by persons who cannot beLesson 11 lists **different kinds of estoppel** recognised in Indian law. Which set lists In *Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghosh*, (1930) 30 Cal. 530 PC, the Privy Council laid down aThe general rule of **estoppel** under Section 115 of the Indian Evidence Act is based on Section 4 of the Indian Evidence Act distinguishes between **"may presume"**, **"shall pre