Believe you are trying to rope in a circumstantial witness to court in support of your cse/defence
Circumstantial witnesses are those who give evidence as to the circumstances from which an inference is to be drawn as to the fact in issue.
However, in Bhalchandra Namdeo Shinde v. State of Maharashtra, it was held that an effect of the communication can be brought to the Court for admitting as evidence and not the whole conversation. This will be done in cases when the person is accused of a criminal offence.
Section 124 of the Indian Evidence Act states about official communications. The provisions envisaged therein talk about that a public officer cannot be compelled to disclose the conversations which were made to him. Such communications which are made to the public officer need to be in official confidence. The documents which are made under the process of law are documents which can be produced as evidence in the Court. It depends upon the public officer to ascertain whether disclosure of the document in the official communication would be detrimental to the public interest or not.
Also, whenever a document is summoned, the concerned officer needs to bring that document to the Court. Thus, it is upon the Court to decide whether the document so produced is privileged or not.
The Indian Evidence Act is the complete code for Evidence Law in India. The Evidence Act provides for provisions to provide evidence in both civil suits as well as criminal trials. As per the Evidence Act, any person who is competent is allowed to give evidence to meet the ends of justice. Sometimes, a witness can be saved from providing evidence whereas sometimes they can be compelled to produce certain documents.
