direct evidence
The phrase has two senses, and students mix them up. In the first, direct evidence is opposed to circumstantial evidence: an eyewitness who saw the stabbing gives direct evidence of the fact in issue, while evidence of motive or of the accused being seen nearby is circumstantial and needs inference.
In the second, s.55 BSA (old s.60 Evidence Act) says oral evidence must in all cases be “direct”: of a fact which could be seen, by a witness who says he saw it; of a fact which could be heard, by one who heard it; and of an opinion, by the person who holds it. Here “direct” is opposed to hearsay, not to circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence can be proved by direct oral evidence.
Example
The neighbour's account of what the servant told her is not direct evidence under s.55 BSA but hearsay, and is inadmissible to prove the assault.
In Indian law
- Section 55 BSA (old s.60 Evidence Act): oral evidence must be direct
See also
evidence · documentary evidence · expert opinion
Read more in the study notes
- Administrative law: meaning, nature, scope, growth and sources (Administrative Law)
- Separation of powers and its bearing on administrative law (Administrative Law)
- Delegated legislation: meaning, growth, merits and administrative directions (Administrative Law)
- Control of delegated legislation: parliamentary, procedural and judicial (Administrative Law)
- Audi alteram partem: the right to a fair hearing (Administrative Law)
- Reasoned decisions, exceptions to natural justice, effect of breach and Article 136 (Administrative Law)