What is a key distinction between sections 135 and 137 exclusionary discretions?

The key distinction related to the sections 135 and 137 exclusionary discretions lies in the nuanced standards by which evidence may be excluded due to its prejudicial impact versus its probative value. Section 135 provides that the court must exclude evidence if it is unfairly prejudicial or misleading, while section 137 specifically addresses situations where the probative value of the evidence is 'substantially outweighed' by the danger of unfair prejudice.

Thus, understanding the framing of probative value in terms of “substantial” versus simply “outweighed” is crucial. Section 137 has a higher threshold for excluding evidence because it needs to be proven that the probative value does not simply come close to being outweighed but is in fact significantly outweighed by potential prejudicial effects. This distinction is critical when assessing the admissibility of evidence in legal proceedings.

The other options do not correctly capture the essence of the distinctions between the two sections. For instance, section 135 is not exclusively mandatory, nor does section 137 only apply to prosecution cases. Hence, it is fundamental to grasp these differences to proficiently navigate the implications of evidence exclusion in legal contexts.