Abstract:
Appropriate evaluation and admissibility of evidence are essential for a fair trial, and the purpose of this study is to identify the challenges, dilemmas, and misconceptions associated with the relevancy of facts during evaluation and admissibility of evidence. Major problem is that due to this confusion of court and misreading of an evidence many times irrelevant evidence become relevant which ultimately affect the decision and processes of justice. The purpose of this study is to eliminate hurdles and challenges en countered by Pakistani courts while separating significant facts from irrelevant facts. It will provide clear and fair standards for the rearrangement of pertinent facts to prevent courts from introducing ambiguity and misunderstanding during the evaluation of evidence. Identifying a test for the relevancy of a fact and the use of evidence's probative value through a comparison analysis would greatly assist in resolving these challenges and presenting a recommended remedy.
