Indian Evidence Act - 1

Hearsay evidence is that which has been derived by other person. In case of hearsay evidence, the person giving evidence does not take the responsibility of its veracity.
Newspaper report about any matter is hearsay evidence. 

A disputed handwriting can be proved by any of the given cases; depends on the court's discretion.

In relation to a court question, the adverse party can cross-examine only with the permission of the court. 

In general, the evidence of a witness is given orally and this means oral evidence.
The documents including records produced for the inspection of the court are called documentary evidence.
So, evidence may be both ocular evidence and documentary evidence and admissible in the court of law. 

The cries of the mob are relevant as explanatory of the nature of the transaction.

The leading English case of R. V. Blake and Tye in evidence relates to conspiracy under Section 10 of the Evidence Act.

Sanatan Gauda vs. Berhampur University and Others, Kumari Madhuri Patil vs. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development, R. S. Madanappa vs.Chandramma are the leading cases related with the issues of estoppel.

Dying declaration has been dealt in the Indian Evidence Act under Section 32(1). When the statement is made by a person as to the cause of his death or as to any of the circumstances of the transaction which resulted in his death, in cases in which the cause of that person’s death comes into question, such statements are relevant whether the person who made them was or was not at the time when they were made under the exception of death and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question.
 

Under Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, no confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence. 

The expression 'res gestae' is a Latin word; literally means the thing done, a transaction or essential circumstance surrounding the subject. 

The leading judgement on dying declaration came on Khushal Rao vs. State of Bombay.

A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant in a criminal proceeding if the making of the confession appears to the court to have been caused by any inducement, threat or promise.

Whether evidence can be recorded by videoconferencing was decided in the leading case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Prafull B. Desai.

All are correct definitions provided under the Indian Evidence Act.

Under Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act, where there is reasonable ground to believe that two or more persons have conspired together to commit an offence or an actionable wrong, anything said, done or written by any one of such persons in reference to their common intention, after the time when such intention was first entertained by any one of them is a relevant fact as against each of the persons believed to be so conspiring as well as for the purpose of proving the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose showing that any such persons was a party to it.