AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Fawcett, J.—I hold the document is relevant and admissible.
It is relied on regarding accused''s intention, and if this is what he wrote or typed, it falls under Sections 9 and 14 of the Indian Evidence Act.
It is an original, so far as it is relied on as a piece of evidence, found in accused''s possession, and alleged to implicate him; so the question of its being secondary evidence of an original letter does not bar its admission.
As to the question whether a letter in accordance with this document was actually sent) to Mr. Horniman, this is a distinct question on which it is open to counsel to argue before the Court or to adduce evidence : but I do not agree with Mr. Talyarkhan that it is necessary for the prosecution to prove that such a letter was sent, before this document earn be admitted.
Document admitted, subject to evidence as to the signature being accused''s or the typewriting being from the machine, Ex. I.