Medical law: expert witness: practice question

A Forensic Medicine question in the style of the NEET PG paper. Answer it first, then read why the right option is right and why each of the others is wrong.

Try it

Forensic Medicine · Medical law: expert witness

Sample item

In court, an autopsy surgeon first describes the injuries he saw and then says the death was due to head injury. How is his testimony classified?

ABoth parts are hearsay, as he did not see the assaultBThe whole statement is binding on the court because he is a doctorCOnly the opinion is admissible, never the descriptionDHis description is evidence of fact, and his opinion on cause is expert evidence under Section 45, which the court is not bound to accept

Original practice item, not a recalled exam question. Nothing here is recorded.

The answer and the reasoning

D. His description is evidence of fact, and his opinion on cause is expert evidence under Section 45, which the court is not bound to accept

A doctor is a witness of fact when describing what he found and an expert witness when giving an opinion, under Section 45 of the Evidence Act (BSA Section 39). Expert opinion is advisory; the court weighs it with other evidence and is not bound by it.

Option by option

A. Both parts are hearsay, as he did not see the assault
The findings he personally observed are direct evidence, not hearsay.
B. The whole statement is binding on the court because he is a doctor
Expert opinion is never binding on the court.
C. Only the opinion is admissible, never the description
Both his description and his opinion are admissible.
D. His description is evidence of fact, and his opinion on cause is expert evidence under Section 45, which the court is not bound to accept (correct)
Correct. Fact and opinion are distinct, and the opinion remains advisory.

Source note: Original NextPrep sample item — pending expert review. This item is original practice material awaiting independent expert review, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.

Questions about this Forensic Medicine question

What is the answer to this Forensic Medicine question?

The best answer is D, His description is evidence of fact, and his opinion on cause is expert evidence under Section 45, which the court is not bound to accept. A doctor is a witness of fact when describing what he found and an expert witness when giving an opinion, under Section 45 of the Evidence Act (BSA Section 39).

Why is "Both parts are hearsay, as he did not see the assault" not the answer?

The findings he personally observed are direct evidence, not hearsay.

Why is "The whole statement is binding on the court because he is a doctor" not the answer?

Expert opinion is never binding on the court.

Why is "Only the opinion is admissible, never the description" not the answer?

Both his description and his opinion are admissible.

What concept does this question test?

It tests Medical law: expert witness in Forensic Medicine. Expert opinion is advisory; the court weighs it with other evidence and is not bound by it.

How hard is this question?

We tag it as an application question: it asks you to use a fact on a patient or a finding. The tag is our own editorial judgement, not an official difficulty rating, so read the reason for every option, not only the answer.

How should I study Medical law: expert witness?

Learn postmortem changes with their timelines, and toxicology as poison, sign, test and antidote. Then use the flashcards and the other Forensic Medicine questions on this site to test what stuck.

Is this a real NEET PG question?

No. It is an original practice item (editorial status: sample, version 1). NextPrep does not publish recalled or leaked questions, and independent faculty review of this item has not been completed yet, so confirm important facts in a standard textbook.