This document discusses evidence and its assessment in legal cases. It defines evidence as the basis for belief or disbelief, and typically includes witness testimony, documents, photographs, and other materials. Evidence must be relevant to the case and admissible in court. There are several types of evidence, such as direct, circumstantial, forensic, and documentary evidence. For evidence to be admitted, it must pass tests for relevance and reliability. Prosecutors must also consider whether there is a realistic prospect of conviction based on the evidence and whether prosecution would be in the public interest based on factors for and against prosecution.

1. Assessment Of
Evidence
Chaudhary Muhammad Jahangir
Deputy Prosecutor General/
Chief Public Prosecutor Punjab/
Director Inspection PPD

2. What is evidence?
 Basis for belief or disbelief
 Evidence typically includes testimony of witness,
documents, photographs, items of damaged
property, government records, videos and
laboratory reports
.

3.  According to Black’s Law Dictoionary
“Evidence is the testimony of a witness or
document or regarding any material which
leads to a logical end for justice
.

4. Admissible Evidence
The evidence that a trial judge or jury may
consider, because the rules of evidence deem it
reliable
In Admissible Evidence
Testimony or other evidence that fails to meet set
court rules governing the types of evidence that
can be presented to a judge or jury.
.

5. Reasons for inadmissibility of evidence
 Testimony that does not fetters up the
sequence of transactions in a case or
renders the whole sequence defected
not tend to be admissible evidence.
.

6. Reasons for inadmissibility of evidence
 The main reason why evidence is ruled
inadmissible is because it falls into a category
deemed so unreliable that a court should not
consider it as part of a deciding a case –for
example, hearsay evidence, or an expert’s
opinion that is not based on facts generally
accepted in the field..
.

7. Reasons for inadmissibility of evidence
 Evidence will also be declared
inadmissible if it suffers from some other
defect–for example, as compared to its
value, it will take too long to present or
risks enflaming the judge, as might be the
case with graphic pictures of a murder
victim.
.

8. Reasons for inadmissibility of evidence
 Evidence will also be declared
inadmissible if it suffers from some other
defect–for example, as compared to its
value, it will take too long to present or
risks enflaming the judge, as might be the
case with graphic pictures of a murder
victim.
.

9. Reasons for inadmissibility of evidence
 In addition, in criminal cases, evidence
that is gathered using illegal methods is
commonly ruled inadmissible
.

10. Relevency Of Evidence.
Evidence is deemed relevant if it has a tendency to
make a fact more or less probable than it would be
without the addition of the offered evidence. All
relevant evidence is admissible--unless a special
exclusionary rule applies or the court determines the
probative value is substantially outweighed by
pragmatic considerations such as unfair prejudice or
undue delay. Evidence that is not relevant is
inadmissible.
.

11. Kinds Of Evidence
 Direct Evidence.
Direct evidence is testimony or other
evidence that expressly proves the
existence of a fact or proposition. In
other words, direct evidence does not
require the hearer to infer or deduce a
conclusion.
.

12. Kinds Of Evidence
 Circumstantial Evidence.
Circumstantial evidence, also called indirect
evidence, is the opposite of direct evidence.
With circumstantial evidence, a fact is
being presented to logically infer another
fact. Examples of circumstantial evidence
include fibers, fluids and other physical
objects.
.

13. Kinds Of Evidence
 Forensic Evidence.
Forensic evidence includes.
 Physical Evidence
 Biological Evidece
 Trace Evidence
 Drug Evidence
.

14. Kinds Of Evidence
 Hearsay Evidence .
Hearsay is any out-of-court statement
being offered in court to prove the truth of
the matter asserted. As a general rule,
hearsay is prohibited.
.

15. Kinds Of Evidence
 Hearsay Evidence .
Exceptions Of Hearsay Evidence
Law of evidence provides for numerous exceptions
to the rule, however, including statements made
by a defendant, statements made as a dying
declaration or to receive medical help, and
statements pertaining to the speaker's state of
mind.
.

16. Kinds Of Evidence
 Documentary Evidence .
Documentary evidence is often a kind of
real evidence.
When a document is used this way it is
authenticated the same way as any other
real evidence--by a witness who identifies it
or, less commonly, by witnesses who
establish a chain of custody for it
.

17. Kinds Of Evidence
 Electronic Evidence .
As of the provisions of Article 164 Of QSO.
In such cases as the Court may consider appropriate, the
Court may allow to be produced any evidence that may have
become available because of modern devices or techniques
.

18. Test Of Evidence
 Whether a fit case for prosecution.
The prosecutor in the first instance has to
apply this test to the available evidence on
file that whether it is a fit Case for
prosecution or not?
.

19. Test Of Evidence
 Realistic Prospect Of Conviction.
The most important and the rudimentary test while assessing
the evidential value of a case shall be whether it is a case fit
for prosecution.
And whether there is realistic prospect of conviction in this
case.
.

20. Test Of Evidence
 Public Interest Test.
 Where there is a realistic prospect of
conviction, the prosecutor is required to
consider whether it is in accordance with
public interest to prosecute - the Public
Interest test. All prosecutions are in public
interest unless there are factors in existence
that require a prosecution may not be made.
Only where both tests are satisfied will the
prosecutor decide to prosecute
.

21. Test Of Evidence
 Public Interest Test.
 In terrorism cases.
In terrorism cases the scope of the
prosecution is always vast as these relate
to public interest.
.

22. Test Of Evidence
 Public Interest Test.
 Public interest factors.
 In considering public interest factors it is not
simply a matter of adding up the number of
factors for and against each side and seeing
which side has the greater number. Each case
must be considered on its own facts and on its
own merits. Prosecutors must assess the overall
impact of the public interest factors upon the
decision and the case. It may be possible that
only one factor may outweigh all other factors
put togather.
.

23. Test Of Evidence
 Instances Of Public Interest Factors In Favour Of Prosecution
 Seriousness of offence; an offence is serious if it involves a
substantial unlawful gain or substantial loss to some person.
 The offence involves breach of trust by a person holding money
or property in trust for a child or a vulnerable person or in
relation to a charity.
 The offence involves the inflicting of an intentional debilitating
injury to a person.
 The offence is planned or is the outcome of a concerted and
coordinated activity.
 Offence committed by a group.
 The offence is against a vulnerable person.
 The offence was committed against a public servant while acting
in the discharge of his duties.
 An offence is the outcome of hatred on account of race, caste,
religion or sect.
.

24. Test Of Evidence
 Instances Of Public Interest Factors In Favour Of Prosecution
 The accused has previous convictions of the
same or serious nature.
 The accused has committed the offence while on
bail or on probation.
 The offence causes a public nuisance, restricts
use of public health or morals.
 The offence includes an element of corruption or
misappropriation of public money.
 There is a likelihood of recurrence of offence.
 The offence involves a terrorist act.
.

25. Test Of Evidence
 Instances Of Public Interest Factors against Prosecution
 The sentence to be imposed is likely to be minor.
 The offence carries a small punishment and is not likely to be
repeated.
 The accused is an elderly and infirm person.
 Before or during the trial the accused is suffering from a
significantly seriously mental or physical illness.
 The victim or the witnesses would be subjected to risk of serious
physical or mental trauma if the case is allowed to proceed.
 The loss or harm caused by the offence is slight and was a result
of single incident or it was caused by an error of judgment or
genuine mistake.
 The loss or harm caused by the offence is slight and was a result
of single incident or it was caused by an error of judgment or
genuine mistake.
 The offence is a result of a misunderstanding of the law and the
offender has not obtained any advantage from the act.
.

26. Test Of Evidence
 Instances Of Public Interest Factors against Prosecution
 There is a long passage of time between the time of
occurrence of offence and date of trial unless the
offence is serious, or the delay is attributable to the
accused or the offence has recently come to light, or
the investigation is complex and the delay is justified
due to complexity of the case.
 The offender has cooperated in the investigation and
is ready to undo the effects of his action.
 The offence has been lawfully compounded or may be
compounded.
 The offence is not of a serious nature and has
occurred as a result of grave provocation
.

27. Test Of Evidence
 Following Factor Must Not Be Considered While
Assessing Public Interest.
 The possible political consequences of the
exercise of the discretion;
 The prosecutor’s personal feelings
concerning the alleged offender or victim,
if this be the case the prosecutor should
withdraw himself from the charge of the
case
.

28. Thank You
.