Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 Act 47 PDF

SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 1 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Sakshya Adhiniyam, 20231 [Act 47 of 2023] [25th December, 2023] CONTENTS PART I CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title, application and commencement 2. Definitions PART II CHAPTER II RELEVANCY OF FACTS 3. Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts Closely connected facts 4. Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction 5. Facts which are occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue or relevant facts 6. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct 7. Facts necessary to explain or introduce fact in issue or relevant facts 8. Things said or done by conspirator in reference to common design 9. When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant 10. Facts tending to enable Court to determine amount are relevant in suits for damages 11. Facts relevant when right or custom is in question SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 2 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body or bodily feeling 13. Facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or intentional 14. Existence of course of business when relevant Admissions 15. Admission defined 16. Admission by party to proceeding or his agent 17. Admissions by persons whose position must be proved as against party to suit 18. Admissions by persons expressly referred to by party to suit 19. Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf 20. When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant 21. Admissions in civil cases when relevant 22. Confession caused by inducement, threat, coercion or promise, when irrelevant in criminal proceeding 23. Confession to police officer 24. Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial for same offence. 25. Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop Statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses 26. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant 27. Relevancy of Certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, truth of facts therein stated Statements made under special circumstances 28. Entries in books of account when relevant SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 3 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29. Relevancy of entry in public record or an electronic record made in performance of duty 30. Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans 31. Relevancy of statement as to fact of public nature contained in certain Acts or notifications 32. Relevancy of statements as to any law contained in law books including electronic or digital form How much of a statement is to be proved 33. What evidence to be given when statement forms part of a conversation, document, electronic record, book or series of letters or papers Judgments of Courts when relevant 34. Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial 35. Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction 36. Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in Section 35 37. Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in Sections 34, 35 and 36 when relevant 38. Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved Opinions of third persons when relevant 39. Opinions of experts 40. Facts bearing upon opinions of experts 41. Opinion as to handwriting and signature, when relevant 42. Opinion as to existence of general custom or right, when relevant 43. Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant 44. Opinion on relationship, when relevant 45. Grounds of opinion, when relevant SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 4 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Character when relevant 46. In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed, irrelevant 47. In criminal cases previous good character relevant 48. Evidence of character or previous sexual experience not relevant in certain cases 49. Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply 50. Character as affecting damages PART III CHAPTER III FACTS WHICH NEED NOT BE PROVED 51. Fact judicially noticeable need not be proved 52. Facts of which Court shall take judicial notice 53. Facts admitted need not be proved CHAPTER IV OF ORAL EVIDENCE 54. Proof of facts by oral evidence 55. Oral evidence to be direct CHAPTER V OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 56. Proof of contents of documents 57. Primary Evidence 58. Secondary evidence 59. Proof of documents by primary evidence 60. Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given 61. Electronic or digital record 62. Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 5 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- record 63. Admissibility of electronic records 64. Rules as to notice to produce 65. Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document produced 66. Proof as to electronic signature 67. Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested 68. Proof where no attesting witness found 69. Admission of execution by party to attested document 70. Proof when attesting witness denies execution 71. Proof of document not required by law to be attested 72. Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved 73. Proof as to verification of digital signature Public documents 74. Public and private documents 75. Certified copies of public documents 76. Proof of documents by production of certified copies 77. Proof of other official documents Presumptions as to documents 78. Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies 79. Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence, etc 80. Presumption as to Gazettes, newspapers, and other documents 81. Presumption as to Gazettes in electronic or digital record 82. Presumption as to maps or plans made by authority of SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 6 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Government 83. Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decisions 84. Presumption as to powers-of-attorney 85. Presumption as to electronic agreements 86. Presumption as to electronic records and electronic signatures 87. Presumption as to Electronic Signature Certificates 88. Presumption as to certified copies of foreign judicial records 89. Presumption as to books, maps and charts 90. Presumption as to electronic messages 91. Presumption as to due execution, etc., of documents not produced 92. Presumption as to documents thirty years old 93. Presumption as to electronic records five years old CHAPTER VI OF THE EXCLUSION OF ORAL EVIDENCE BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 94. Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of document 95. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement 96. Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous document 97. Exclusion of evidence against application of document to existing facts 98. Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts 99. Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of several persons 100. Evidence as to application of language to one of two SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 7 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- sets of facts, to neither of which the whole correctly applies 101. Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc 102. Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document 103. Saving of provisions of Indian Succession Act relating to wills PART IV CHAPTER VII OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF 104. Burden of proof 105. On whom burden of proof lies 106. Burden of proof as to particular fact 107. Burden of proving fact to be proved to make evidence admissible 108. Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions 109. Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge 110. Burden of proving death of person known to have been alive within thirty years 111. Burden of proving that person is alive who has not been heard of for seven years 112. Burden of proof as to relationship in the cases of partners, landlord and tenant, principal and agent 113. Burden of proof as to ownership 114. Proof of good faith in transactions where one party is in relation of active confidence 115. Presumption as to certain offences 116. Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy 117. Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 8 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 118. Presumption as to dowry death 119. Court may presume existence of certain facts 120. Presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecution for rape CHAPTER VIII ESTOPPEL 121. Estoppel 122. Estoppel of tenant and of licensee of person in possession. 123. Estoppel of acceptor of bill of exchange, bailee or licensee CHAPTER IX OF WITNESSES 124. Who may testify. 125. Witness unable to communicate verbally 126. Competency of husband and wife as witnesses in certain cases 127. Judges and Magistrates 128. Communications during marriage 129. Evidence as to affairs of State 130. Official Communications 131. Information as to commission of offences 132. Professional communications 133. Privilege not waived by volunteering evidence 134. Confidential communication with legal advisers 135. Production of title-deeds of witness not a party 136. Production of documents or electronic records which another person, having possession, could refuse to produce SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 9 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 137. Witness not excused from answering on ground that answer will criminate 138. Accomplice 139. Number of witnesses CHAPTER X OF EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES 140. Order of production and examination of witnesses 141. Judge to decide as to admissibility of evidence 142. Examination of witnesses 143. Order of examinations. 144. Cross-examination of person called to produce a document 145. Witnesses to character 146. Leading questions. 147. Evidence as to matters in writing 148. Cross-examination as to previous statements in writing 149. Questions lawful in Cross-examination 150. When witness to be compelled to answer 151. Court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness compelled to answer 152. Question not to be asked without reasonable grounds 153. Procedure of Court in case of question being asked without reasonable grounds 154. Indecent and scandalous questions 155. Questions intended to insult or annoy 156. Exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing veracity 157. Question by party to his own witness SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 10 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 158. Impeaching credit of witness 159. Questions tending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact, admissible 160. Former statements of witness may be proved to corroborate later testimony as to same fact 161. What matters may be proved in connection with proved statement relevant under Section 26 or Section 27 162. Refreshing memory 163. Testimony to facts stated in document mentioned in Section 162 164. Right of adverse party as to writing used to refresh memory 165. Production of documents 166. Giving, as evidence, of document called for and produced on notice 167. Using, as evidence, of document production of which was refused on notice 168. Judge's power to put questions or order production CHAPTER XI OF IMPROPER ADMISSION AND REJECTION OF EVIDENCE 169. No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence CHAPTER XII REPEAL AND SAVINGS 170. Repeal and savings THE SCHEDULE Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 [Act 47 of 2023] [25th December, 2023] SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 11 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ——— An Act to consolidate and to provide for general rules and principles of evidence for fair trial Be it enacted by Parliament in the Seventy-fourth Year of the Republic of India as follows:— Statement of Objects And Reasons.—The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was enacted in the year 1872 with a view to consolidate the law relating to evidence on which the Court could come to the conclusion about the facts of the case and then pronounce judgment thereupon and it came into force on 1st September, 1872. 2. The experience of seven decades of Indian democracy calls for comprehensive review of our criminal laws including the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and adopt them in accordance with the contemporary needs and aspirations of the people. The law of evidence (not being substantive or procedural law), falls in the category of “adjective law”, that defines the pleading and methodology by which the substantive or procedural laws are operationalised. The existing law does not address the technological advancement undergone in the country during the last few decades. 3. Accordingly, a Bill, namely, the Bharatiya Sakshya Bill, 2023 was introduced in Lok Sabha on 11th August, 2023. The Bill was referred to the Department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs for its consideration and report. The Committee after deliberations made its recommendations in its report submitted on 10th November, 2023. The recommendations made by the Committee have been considered by the Government and it has been decided to withdraw the Bill pending in Lok Sabha and introduce a new Bill incorporating therein those recommendations made by the Committee that have been accepted by the Government. 4. The proposed legislation, inter alia, provides as under:— (i) it provides that “evidence” includes any information given electronically, which would permit appearance of witnesses, accused, experts and victims through electronic means; (ii) it provides for admissibility of an electronic or digital record as evidence having the same legal effect, validity and enforceability as any other document; (iii) it seeks to expand the scope of secondary evidence to include copies made from original by mechanical processes, copies made from or compared with the original, counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not execute them and oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself seen it and giving matching hash value of original record will be admissible as proof of evidence in the form of secondary SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 12 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- evidence; (iv) it seeks to put limits on the facts which are admissible and its certification as such in the courts. The proposed Bill introduces more precise and uniform rules of practice of courts in dealing with facts and circumstances of the case by means of evidence. 5. The Notes on Clauses explain the various provisions of the Bill. 6. The Bill seeks to achieve the above objectives. Part I Chapter I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title, application and commencement.—(1) This Act may be called the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. (2) It applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including Courts-martial, but not to affidavits presented to any Court or 2 officer, nor to proceedings before an arbitrator 3 (3) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, appoint. Corresponding Law: S. 1 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Applicability.—The Evidence Act has no application to enquiries conducted by tribunals even though they may be judicial in character. Rules of natural justice will apply, Union of India v. T.R. Verma, 1957 SCC OnLine SC 30. ► The Act is inapplicable to arbitration proceedings, Municipal Corpn. of Delhi v. Jagan Nath Ashok Kumar, (1987) 4 SCC 497. ► The Act does not apply to a quasi-judicial proceeding, Union of India v. T.R. Varma, AIR 1957 SC 882. 2. Definitions.—(1) In this Adhiniyam, unless the context otherwise requires,— (a) “Court” includes all Judges and Magistrates, and all persons, except arbitrators, legally authorised to take evidence; Corresponding Law: S. 3 of Act 1 of 1872. (b) “conclusive proof” means when one fact is declared by this Adhiniyam to be conclusive proof of another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it; Corresponding Law: S. 4 of Act 1 of 1872. (c) “disproved” in relation to a fact, means when, after considering the matters before it, the Court either believes that it does not exist, or considers its non-existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it does not exist; SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 13 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Corresponding Law: S. 3 of Act 1 of 1872. (d) “document” means any matter expressed or described or otherwise recorded upon any substance by means of letters, figures or marks or any other means or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which may be used, for the purpose of recording that matter and includes electronic 4 and digital records. Illustrations (i) A writing is a document. (ii) Words printed, lithographed or photographed are documents. (iii) A map or plan is a document. (iv) An inscription on a metal plate or stone is a document. (v) A caricature is a document. (vi) An electronic record on emails, server logs, documents on computers, laptop or smartphone, messages, websites, locational evidence and voice mail messages stored on digital devices are documents; Corresponding Law: S. 3 of Act 1 of 1872. (e) “evidence” means and includes— (i) all statements including statements given electronically which the Court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses in relation to matters of fact under inquiry and 5 such statements are called oral evidence ; 6 (ii) all documents including electronic or digital records produced for the inspection of the Court and such documents are called documentary evidence; Corresponding Law: S. 3 of Act 1 of 1872. (f) “fact” means and includes— (i) any thing, state of things, or relation of things, capable of being perceived by the senses; (ii) any mental condition of which any person is conscious. Illustrations (i) That there are certain objects arranged in a certain order in a certain place, is a fact. (ii) That a person heard or saw something, is a fact. (iii) That a person said certain words, is a fact. (iv) That a person holds a certain opinion, has a certain intention, acts in good faith, or fraudulently, or uses a particular word in a particular sense, or is or was at a specified time conscious of a particular sensation, is a fact; Corresponding Law: S. 3 of Act 1 of 1872 SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 14 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (g) “facts in issue” means and includes any fact from which, either by itself or in connection with other facts, the existence, non-existence, nature or extent of any right, liability or disability, asserted or denied in any suit or proceeding, necessarily follows. Explanation.—Whenever, under the provisions of the law for the time being in force relating to civil procedure, any Court records an issue of fact, the fact to be asserted or denied in the answer to such issue is a fact in issue. Illustrations A is accused of the murder of B. At his trial, the following facts may be in issue.— (i) That A caused B's death. (ii) That A intended to cause B's death. (iii) That A had received grave and sudden provocation from B. (iv) That A, at the time of doing the act which caused B's death, was, by reason of unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing its nature; Corresponding Law: S. 3 of Act 1 of 1872. (h) “may presume”.—Whenever it is provided by this Adhiniyam that the Court may presume a fact, it may either regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved or may call for proof of it; Corresponding Law: S. 4 of Act 1 of 1872. (i) “not proved”.—A fact is said to be not proved when it is neither proved nor disproved; Corresponding Law: S. 3 of Act 1 of 1872. (j) “proved”.—A fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters before it, the Court either believes it to exist, or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists; Corresponding Law: S. 3 of Act 1 of 1872. (k) “relevant”.—A fact is said to be relevant to another when it is connected with the other in any of the ways referred to in the provisions of this Adhiniyam relating to the relevancy of facts; Corresponding Law: S. 3 of Act 1 of 1872. (l) “shall presume”.—Whenever it is directed by this Adhiniyam that the Court shall presume a fact, it shall regard such fact as proved, unless and until it is disproved. Corresponding Law: S. 4 of Act 1 of 1872. (2) Words and expressions used herein and not defined but defined SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 15 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- in the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 shall have the same meanings as assigned to them in the said Act and Sanhitas. ► Expression “proved”, “disproved” and “not proved”.— These expressions, lays down the standard of proof, namely, about existence or non- existence of circumstances from the point of view of a prudent man, so much so that while adopting the said requirement, as an appropriate concrete standard to measure “proof”, full effect has to be given to the circumstances or conditions of probability or improbability, Kuna v. State of Odisha, (2018) 1 SCC 296. ► Fact.— The expression “fact” includes not only the physical act which can be perceived by the senses but also the psychological fact or mental condition of which any person is conscious and that it is in the former sense that the word used by the Legislature refers to a material and not to a mental fact, H.P. Administration v. Om Prakash, (1972) 1 SCC 249 : 1972 SCC (Cri) 88. ► Meaning and Purpose of presumption.—Presumption means taking as true without examination or proof. It is by which the courts are enabled and entitled to pronounce on an issue, notwithstanding that there is no evidence or insufficient evidence, Kumar Exports v. Sharma Carpets, (2009) 2 SCC 513. ► Presumptions-When may not be invoked.— When truth or fact is known, there is no need or room for any presumption. When there is a conflict between a “conclusive proof” envisaged under law based on a presumption and a proof based on scientific advancement accepted by the world community to be correct, the latter must prevail over the former, Nandlal Wasudeo Badwaik v. Lata Nandlal Badwaik, (2014) 2 SCC 576. ► Rebuttable Presumption.— Presumption when rebuttable, points out the party on whom lies the duty of going forward with evidence on the fact presumed, and when that party produced the evidence tending to show that the real fact is not as presumed, the purpose of presumption is over, Sodhi Transport Co. v. State of U.P., (1986) 2 SCC 486. ► Conclusive Proof.— When Act enjoins that any evidence would be treated as conclusive proof of certain factual situations or legal hypothesis, law would forbid other evidence to be adduced for purpose of contradicting or varying such conclusiveness, State of Kerala v. Mohd. Basheer, (2019) 4 SCC 260. Part II Chapter II RELEVANCY OF FACTS 3. Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts.— Evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence or non -existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others. Explanation.—This section shall not enable any person to give evidence of a fact which he is disentitled to prove by any provision of SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 16 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- the law for the time being in force relating to civil procedure. Illustrations (a) A is tried for the murder of B by beating him with a club with the intention of causing his death. At A's trial the following facts are in issue.— A's beating B with the club; A's causing B's death by such beating; A's intention to cause B's death. (b) A suitor does not bring with him, and have in readiness for production at the first hearing of the case, a bond on which he relies. This section does not enable him to produce the bond or prove its contents at a subsequent stage of the proceedings, otherwise than in accordance with the conditions prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908). Corresponding Law: S. 5 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Admissibility of evidence.—Evidence may be given “of every fact in issue” and of such other facts which are expressly “declared to be relevant” and of no other facts, State of Maharashtra v. Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil Ansari, (2013) 12 SCC 17 : (2013) 4 SCC (Cri) 202. ► Principal rules of exclusion where evidence becomes inadmissible.— The principal rule of exclusion under which evidence becomes inadmissible are two-fold. First, evidence of relevant fact is inadmissible when its reception offends against public policy or a particular rule of law. Some matters are privileged from disclosure. A party is sometimes estopped from proving facts and these facts are therefore inadmissible. The exclusion of evidence of opinion and of extrinsic evidence of the contents of some documents is again a rule of law. Second, relevant facts are subject to recognised exceptions inadmissible, unless they are proved by the best or the prescribed evidence, State of U.P. v. Raj Narain, (1975) 4 SCC 428. Closely connected facts 4. Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction.—Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue or a relevant fact as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether they 7 occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places. Illustrations (a) A is accused of the murder of B by beating him. Whatever was said or done by A or B or the bystanders at the beating, or so shortly before or after it as to form part of the transaction, is a relevant fact. (b) A is accused of waging war against the Government of India by taking part in an armed insurrection in which property is destroyed, troops are attacked and jails are broken open. The SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 17 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- occurrence of these facts is relevant, as forming part of the general transaction, though A may not have been present at all of them. (c) A sues B for a libel contained in a letter forming part of a correspondence. Letters between the parties relating to the subject out of which the libel arose, and forming part of the correspondence in which it is contained, are relevant facts, though they do not contain the libel itself. (d) The question is, whether certain goods ordered from B were delivered to A. The goods were delivered to several intermediate persons successively. Each delivery is a relevant fact. Corresponding Law: S. 6 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Rule of res gestae.—Section 6 of IEA [BSA, 2023 S. 4] is an exception to rule of evidence that hearsay evidence is not admissible. Test for applying rule of res gestae is that statement (or fact) should be spontaneous and should form part of the same transaction ruling out any possibility of concoction, Javed Alam v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2009) 6 SCC 450; (See also Veerendra v. State of M.P., (2022) 8 SCC 668). ► Extra-judicial confession.—Extra-judicial confession, prima facie is a weak evidence and court is reluctant in the absence of a chain of cogent circumstances to rely on it for recording a conviction, Devi Lal v. State of Rajasthan, (2019) 19 SCC 447). (See also, Ishwari Lal Yadav v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2019) 10 SCC 437). 5. Facts which are occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue or 8 relevant facts.—Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect, immediate or otherwise, of relevant facts, or facts in issue, or which constitute the state of things under which they happened, or which afforded an opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant. Illustrations (a) The question is, whether A robbed B. The facts that, shortly before the robbery, B went to a fair with money in his possession, and that he showed it, or mentioned the fact that he had it, to third persons, are relevant. (b) The question is, whether A murdered B. Marks on the ground, produced by a struggle at or near the place where the murder was committed, are relevant facts. (c) The question is, whether A poisoned B. The state of B's health before the symptoms ascribed to poison, and habits of B, known to A, which afforded an opportunity for the administration of poison, are relevant facts. Corresponding Law: S. 7 of Act 1 of 1872. 6. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct.—(1) Any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 18 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- any fact in issue or relevant fact. (2) The conduct of any party, or of any agent to any party, to any suit or proceeding, in reference to such suit or proceeding, or in reference to any fact in issue therein or relevant thereto, and the conduct of any person, an offence against whom is the subject of any proceeding, is relevant, if such conduct influences or is influenced by any fact in issue or relevant fact, and whether it was previous or subsequent thereto. Explanation 1.—The word “conduct” in this section does not include statements, unless those statements accompany and explain acts other than statements; but this explanation is not to affect the relevancy of statements under any other section of this Adhiniyam. Explanation 2.—When the conduct of any person is relevant, any statement made to him or in his presence and hearing, which affects such conduct, is relevant. Illustrations (a) A is tried for the murder of B. The facts that A murdered C, that B knew that A had murdered C, and that B had tried to extort money from A by threatening to make his knowledge public, are relevant. (b) A sues B upon a bond for the payment of money. B denies the making of the bond. The fact that, at the time when the bond was alleged to be made, B required money for a particular purpose, is relevant. (c) A is tried for the murder of B by poison. The fact that, before the death of B, A procured poison similar to that which was administered to B, is relevant. (d) The question is, whether a certain document is the will of A. The facts that, not long before, the date of the alleged will, A made inquiry into matters to which the provisions of the alleged will relate; that he consulted advocates in reference to making the will, and that he caused drafts of other wills to be prepared, of which he did not approve, are relevant. (e) A is accused of a crime. The facts that, either before, or at the time of, or after the alleged crime, A provided evidence which would tend to give to the facts of the case an appearance favourable to himself, or that he destroyed or concealed evidence, or prevented the presence or procured the absence of persons who might have been witnesses, or suborned persons to give false evidence respecting it, are relevant. (f) The question is, whether A robbed B. The facts that, after B was robbed, C said in A's presence—“the police are coming to look for the person who robbed B”, and that immediately afterwards A ran SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 19 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- away, are relevant. (g) The question is, whether A owes B ten thousand rupees. The facts that A asked C to lend him money, and that D said to C in A's presence and hearing—”I advise you not to trust A, for he owes B ten thousand rupees”, and that A went away without making any answer, are relevant facts. (h) The question is, whether A committed a crime. The fact that A absconded, after receiving a letter, warning A that inquiry was being made for the criminal, and the contents of the letter, are relevant. (i) A is accused of a crime. The facts that, after the commission of the alleged crime, A absconded, or was in possession of property or the proceeds of property acquired by the crime, or attempted to conceal things which were or might have been used in committing it, are relevant. (j) The question is, whether A was raped. The fact that, shortly after the alleged rape, A made a complaint relating to the crime, the circumstances under which, and the terms in which, the complaint was made, are relevant. The fact that, without making a complaint, A said that A had been raped is not relevant as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant as a dying declaration under clause (a) of Section 26, or as corroborative evidence under Section 160. (k) The question is, whether A was robbed. The fact that, soon after the alleged robbery, A made a complaint relating to the offence, the circumstances under which, and the terms in which, the complaint was made, are relevant. The fact that A said he had been robbed, without making any complaint, is not relevant, as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant as a dying declaration under clause (a) of Section 26, or as corroborative evidence under Section 160. Corresponding Law: S. 8 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct.—Accused after commission of crime appeared at police station and narrated the occurrence. He lead the police party to his house in presence of the witnesses and showed the dead body of his wife and produced the weapon of offence before the police officer, who seized it by preparing seizure list in presence of the witnesses-Appearance of the accused at the police station and his giving of the information is admissible against him as evidence of his conduct, Tapash Sarkar v. State of Tripura, 2012 SCC OnLine Gau 572. ► Conduct and Subsequent Conduct.—Conduct admissible under Section 8 of Evidence Act [BSA, 2023 Section 6] must be such that it has a close nexus with a fact in issue or relevant fact, State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu, (2005) SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 20 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11 SCC 600 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 1715. ► Conduct as a fact.—When a party makes a claim based upon revocation of earlier will, as indicated in a subsequent will, said acknowledgment of former would form part of conduct leading to a relevant fact vis-à-vis a fact in issue, V. Prabhakara v. Basavaraj K., (2022) 1 SCC 115. 7. Facts necessary to explain or introduce fact in issue or relevant facts.—Facts necessary to explain or introduce a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which support or rebut an inference suggested by a fact in issue or a relevant fact, or which establish the identity of anything, or person whose identity, is relevant, or fix the time or place at which any fact in issue or relevant fact happened, or which show the relation of parties by whom any such fact was transacted, are relevant in so far as they are necessary for that purpose. Illustrations (a) The question is, whether a given document is the will of A. The state of A's property and of his family at the date of the alleged will may be relevant facts. (b) A sues B for a libel imputing disgraceful conduct to A; B affirms that the matter alleged to be libellous is true. The position and relations of the parties at the time when the libel was published may be relevant facts as introductory to the facts in issue. The particulars of a dispute between A and B about a matter unconnected with the alleged libel are irrelevant, though the fact that there was a dispute may be relevant if it affected the relations between A and B. (c) A is accused of a crime. The fact that, soon after the commission of the crime, A absconded from his house, is relevant under Section 6, as conduct subsequent to and affected by facts in issue. The fact that, at the time when he left home, A had sudden and urgent business at the place to which he went, is relevant, as tending to explain the fact that he left home suddenly. The details of the business on which he left are not relevant, except in so far as they are necessary to show that the business was sudden and urgent. (d) A sues B for inducing C to break a contract of service made by him with A.C, on leaving A's service, says to A—“I am leaving you because B has made me a better offer”. This statement is a relevant fact as explanatory of C's conduct, which is relevant as a fact in issue. (e) A, accused of theft, is seen to give the stolen property to B, who is seen to give it to A's wife. B says as he delivers it—“A says you are to hide this”. B's statement is relevant as explanatory of a fact which is part of the transaction. SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 21 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (f) A is tried for a riot and is proved to have marched at the head of a mob. The cries of the mob are relevant as explanatory of the nature of the transaction. Corresponding Law: S. 9 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Test Identification Parade.—Object of TI Parade is (i) to enable witnesses to satisfy themselves that the person whom they suspect is really the one who was seen by them committing the offence; and (ii) to satisfy investigating authorities that suspect is the real person whom witnesses had seen in connection with said occurrence, Ankush Maruti Shinde v. State of Maharashtra, (2009) 6 SCC 667; See also Rajesh v. State of Haryana, (2021) 1 SCC 118. ► Evidentiary value.—The evidence of test identification is admissible under Section 9 of the Evidence Act [BSA, 2023 S. 7]. It can be used only to corroborate the substantive evidence given by the witnesses in court regarding identification of the accused as the doer of the criminal act. The earlier identification made by the witnesses at the test identification parade, by itself, has no independent value, Sampat Tatyada Shinde v. State of Maharashtra, (1974) 4 SCC 213 : 1974 SCC (Cri) 382. ► Validity of Identification Tests/Parade.—Even if identification of accused is by one witness only and other witness who was also present at the crime scene does not participate, investigation is not vitiated, Mohd. Kalam v. State of Rajasthan, (2008) 11 SCC 352. Photograph of accused even if assumed to be published, did not affect validity of parade, even if there was long gap between publication and holding of TI parade, Munna Kumar Upadhyay v. State of A.P., (2012) 6 SCC 174 : (2012) 3 SCC (Cri) 42. 8. Things said or done by conspirator in reference to common design. —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 for the purpose of proving the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose of showing that any such person was a party to it. Illustrations Reasonable ground exists for believing that A has joined in a conspiracy to wage war against the State. The facts that B procured arms in Europe for the purpose of the conspiracy, C collected money in Kolkata for a like object, D persuaded persons to join the conspiracy in Mumbai, E published writings advocating the object in view at Agra, and F transmitted from Delhi to G at Singapore the money which C had collected at Kolkata, and the contents of a letter written by H giving an account of the conspiracy, SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 22 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- are each relevant, both to prove the existence of the conspiracy, and to prove A's complicity in it, although he may have been ignorant of all of them, and although the persons by whom they were done were strangers to him, and although they may have taken place before he joined the conspiracy or after he left it. Corresponding Law: S. 10 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Ingredients.—Section 10 of Evidence Act [BSA, 2023 Section 8] provides unique and special rule of evidence to be followed in case of conspiracy. Once conditions given therein are fulfilled, statement made by one conspirator will be taken as evidence against all other co-conspirators, Yakub Abdul Razak Memon v. State of Maharashtra, (2013) 13 SCC 1. ► Admissibility of statements made by conspirators.—Statement made by conspirators after they are arrested are not admissible, because by that time conspiracy would have ended, State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu, (2005) 11 SCC 600 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 1715. 9. When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant.—Facts not otherwise relevant are relevant— (1) if they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact; (2) if by themselves or in connection with other facts they make the existence or non-existence of any fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or improbable. Illustrations (a) The question is, whether A committed a crime at Chennai on a certain day. The fact that, on that day, A was at Ladakh is relevant. The fact that, near the time when the crime was committed, A was at a distance from the place where it was committed, which would render it highly improbable, though not impossible, that he committed it, is relevant. (b) The question is, whether A committed a crime. The circumstances are such that the crime must have been committed either by A, B, C or D. Every fact which shows that the crime could have been committed by no one else, and that it was not committed by either B, C or D, is relevant. Corresponding Law: S. 11 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Plea of alibi-Nature.—Word alibi means “elsewhere”. Plea of alibi taken by defence is required to be proved only after prosecution has proved its case against accused, Darshan Singh v. State of Punjab, (2016) 3 SCC 37. ► Standard of proof.—A plea of alibi must be proved with absolute certainty so as to completely exclude the possibility of the presence of the person concerned at the place of occurrence, State of Maharashtra v. Narsingrao Gangaram Pimple, (1984) 1 SCC 446 : 1984 SCC (Cri) 109. A plea of alibi has to be proved to the satisfaction of the court, Soma Bhai v. State of Gujarat, (1975) 4 SCC 257 : 1975 SCC (Cri) 515. SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 23 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10. Facts tending to enable Court to determine amount are relevant in suits for damages.—In suits in which damages are claimed, any fact which will enable the Court to determine the amount of damages which ought to be awarded, is relevant. Corresponding Law: S. 12 of Act 1 of 1872. 11. Facts relevant when right or custom is in question.—Where the question is as to the existence of any right or custom, the following facts are relevant— (a) any transaction by which the right or custom in question was created, claimed, modified, recognised, asserted or denied, or which was inconsistent with its existence; (b) particular instances in which the right or custom was claimed, recognised or exercised, or in which its exercise was disputed, asserted or departed from. Illustrations The question is, whether A has a right to a fishery. A deed conferring the fishery on A's ancestors, a mortgage of the fishery by A's father, a subsequent grant of the fishery by A's father, irreconcilable with the mortgage, particular instances in which A's father exercised the right, or in which the exercise of the right was stopped by A's neighbours, are relevant facts. Corresponding Law: S. 13 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Relevance of evidence.—Judgment in a previous suit between same parties is a relevant piece of evidence if it has a material bearing on the controversy arising for decision in the subsequent suit, Madhukar D. Shende v. Tarabai Aba Shedage, (2002) 2 SCC 85. ► Existence of right.—The particular right should be asserted by the transaction and not in the transaction, Bhagwati Prasad Sah v. Rameshwari Kuer, 1951 SCC 486. 12. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body or bodily feeling.—Facts showing the existence of any state of mind, such as intention, knowledge, good faith, negligence, rashness, ill-will or goodwill towards any particular person, or showing the existence of any state of body or bodily feeling, are relevant, when the existence of any such state of mind or body or bodily feeling is in issue or relevant. Explanation 1.—A fact relevant as showing the existence of a relevant state of mind must show that the state of mind exists, not generally, but in reference to the particular matter in question. Explanation 2.—But where, upon the trial of a person accused of an offence, the previous commission by the accused of an offence is relevant within the meaning of this section, the previous conviction of such person shall also be a relevant fact. SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 24 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Illustrations (a) A is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. It is proved that he was in possession of a particular stolen article. The fact that, at the same time, he was in possession of many other stolen articles is relevant, as tending to show that he knew each and all of the articles of which he was in possession to be stolen. (b) A is accused of fraudulently delivering to another person a counterfeit currency which, at the time when he delivered it, he knew to be counterfeit. The fact that, at the time of its delivery, A was possessed of a number of other pieces of counterfeit currency is relevant. The fact that A had been previously convicted of delivering to another person as genuine a counterfeit currency knowing it to be counterfeit is relevant. (c) A sues B for damage done by a dog of B's, which B knew to be ferocious. The fact that the dog had previously bitten X, Y and Z, and that they had made complaints to B, are relevant. (d) The question is, whether A, the acceptor of a bill of exchange, knew that the name of the payee was fictitious. The fact that A had accepted other bills drawn in the same manner before they could have been transmitted to him by the payee if the payee had been a real person, is relevant, as showing that A knew that the payee was a fictitious person. (e) A is accused of defaming B by publishing an imputation intended to harm the reputation of B. The fact of previous publications by A respecting B, showing ill-will on the part of A towards B is relevant, as proving A's intention to harm B's reputation by the particular publication in question. The facts that there was no previous quarrel between A and B, and that A repeated the matter complained of as he heard it, are relevant, as showing that A did not intend to harm the reputation of B. (f) A is sued by B for fraudulently representing to B that C was solvent, whereby B, being induced to trust C, who was insolvent, suffered loss. The fact that, at the time when A represented C to be solvent, C was supposed to be solvent by his neighbours and by persons dealing with him, is relevant, as showing that A made the representation in good faith. (g) A is sued by B for the price of work done by B, upon a house of which A is owner, by the order of C, a contractor. A's defence is that B's contract was with C. The fact that A paid C for the work in question is relevant, as proving that A did, in good faith, make over to C the management of the work in question, so that C was in a position to contract with B on C's own account, and not as agent for A. SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 25 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (h) A is accused of the dishonest misappropriation of property which he had found, and the question is whether, when he appropriated it, he believed in good faith that the real owner could not be found. The fact that public notice of the loss of the property had been given in the place where A was, is relevant, as showing that A did not in good faith believe that the real owner of the property could not be found. The fact that A knew, or had reason to believe, that the notice was given fraudulently by C, who had heard of the loss of the property and wished to set up a false claim to it, is relevant, as showing that the fact that A knew of the notice did not disprove A's good faith. (i) A is charged with shooting at B with intent to kill him. In order to show A's intent, the fact of A's having previously shot at B may be proved. (j) A is charged with sending threatening letters to B. Threatening letters previously sent by A to B may be proved, as showing the intention of the letters. (k) The question is, whether A has been guilty of cruelty towards B, his wife. Expressions of their feeling towards each other shortly before or after the alleged cruelty are relevant facts. (l) The question is, whether A's death was caused by poison. Statements made by A during his illness as to his symptoms are relevant facts. (m) The question is, what was the state of A's health at the time when an assurance on his life was effected. Statements made by A as to the state of his health at or near the time in question are relevant facts. (n) A sues B for negligence in providing him with a car for hire not reasonably fit for use, whereby A was injured. The fact that B's attention was drawn on other occasions to the defect of that particular car is relevant. The fact that B was habitually negligent about the cars which he let to hire is irrelevant. (o) A is tried for the murder of B by intentionally shooting him dead. The fact that A on other occasions shot at B is relevant as showing his intention to shoot B. The fact that A was in the habit of shooting at people with intent to murder them is irrelevant. (p) A is tried for a crime. The fact that he said something indicating an intention to commit that particular crime is relevant. The fact that he said something indicating a general disposition to commit crimes of that class is irrelevant. Corresponding Law: S. 14 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Reaction of eyewitness.—Reaction of an eyewitness on seeing an attack on a person is a normal human conduct and has to be taken into consideration, SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 26 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Surinder Singh v. State of U.P., (2003) 10 SCC 26 : 2004 SCC (Cri) 717. 13. Facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or intentional.—When there is a question whether an act was accidental or intentional, or done with a particular knowledge or intention, the fact that such act formed part of a series of similar occurrences, in each of which the person doing the act was concerned, is relevant. Illustrations (a) A is accused of burning down his house in order to obtain money for which it is insured. The facts that A lived in several houses successively each of which he insured, in each of which a fire occurred, and after each of which fires A received payment from a different insurance company, are relevant, as tending to show that the fires were not accidental. (b) A is employed to receive money from the debtors of B. It is A's duty to make entries in a book showing the amounts received by him. He makes an entry showing that on a particular occasion he received less than he really did receive. The question is, whether this false entry was accidental or intentional. The facts that other entries made by A in the same book are false, and that the false entry is in each case in favour of A, are relevant. (c) A is accused of fraudulently delivering to B a counterfeit currency. The question is, whether the delivery of the currency was accidental. The facts that, soon before or soon after the delivery to B, A delivered counterfeit currency to C, D and E are relevant, as showing that the delivery to B was not accidental. Corresponding Law: S. 15 of Act 1 of 1872. 14. Existence of course of business when relevant.—When there is a question whether a particular act was done, the existence of any course of business, according to which it naturally would have been done, is a relevant fact. Illustrations (a) The question is, whether a particular letter was dispatched. The facts that it was the ordinary course of business for all letters put in a certain place to be carried to the post, and that particular letter was put in that place are relevant. (b) The question is, whether a particular letter reached A. The facts that it was posted in due course, and was not returned through the Return Letter Office, are relevant. Corresponding Law: S. 16 of Act 1 of 1872. Admissions 15. Admission defined.—An admission is a statement, oral or documentary or contained in electronic form, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 27 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned. Corresponding Law: S. 17 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Meaning, nature and Scope of ‘Admission’.—An admission is substantive evidence, though it is open to the person who made the admission to show that the fact admitted is not correct, Narayanswami v. State of Maharashtra, (1971) 2 SCC 182, See also Satrucharla Vijaya Rama Raju v. Nimmaka Jaya Raju, (2006) 1 SCC 212; Natesan Agencies (Plantations) v. State, (2019) 15 SCC 70. Admissions are not conclusive, and unless they constitute estoppel, the maker is at liberty to prove that they were mistaken or were untrue, Kishori Lal v. Chaltibai, AIR 1959 SC 504, See also Union of India v. Ibrahim Uddin, (2012) 8 SCC 148 : (2012) 4 SCC (Civ) 362. ► Admission whether amounting to a confession.—Admission made by a person, whether amounting to a confession or not, cannot be split up and part of it used against him. An admission must be used either as a whole or not at all, Prakash v. State of Karnataka, (2014) 12 SCC 133 : (2014) 6 SCC (Cri) 642. ► Admission by counsel.—Admission of law by counsel binds neither client nor court, Himalayan Coop. Group Housing Society v. Balwan Singh, (2015) 7 SCC 373. ► Statement made to court by counsel-When binding on client.— Unequivocal statement made to court by a counsel in relation to commitment of his client qua the subject-matter of the proceedings in which that counsel was engaged and instructed to appear and where there was no case of client that he had expressly instructed his counsel not to make such a statement, the statement made to the court by the counsel in such a case, held, was binding on his client, Om Prakash v. Suresh Kumar, (2020) 13 SCC 188. 16. Admission by party to proceeding or his agent9.—(1) Statements made by a party to the proceeding, or by an agent to any such party, whom the Court regards, under the circumstances of the case, as expressly or impliedly authorised by him to make them, are admissions. (2) Statements made by— (i) parties to suits suing or sued in a representative character, are not admissions, unless they were made while the party making them held that character; or (ii) (a) persons who have any proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject matter of the proceeding, and who make the statement in their character of persons so interested; or (b) persons from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest in the subject matter of the suit, are admissions, if they are made during the continuance of the interest of the persons making the statements. SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 28 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Corresponding Law: S. 18 of Act 1 of 1872. 17. Admissions by persons whose position must be proved as against party to suit.—Statements made by persons whose position or liability, it is necessary to prove as against any party to the suit, are admissions, if such statements would be relevant as against such persons in relation to such position or liability in a suit brought by or against them, and if they are made whilst the person making them occupies such position or is subject to such liability. Illustrations A undertakes to collect rents for B. B sues A for not collecting rent due from C to B. A denies that rent was due from C to B. A statement by C that he owed B rent is an admission, and is a relevant fact as against A, if A denies that C did owe rent to B. Corresponding Law: S. 19 of Act 1 of 1872. 18. Admissions by persons expressly referred to by party to suit.— Statements made by persons to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in reference to a matter in dispute are admissions. Illustrations The question is, whether a horse sold by A to B is sound. A says to B—“Go and ask C, C knows all about it”. C's statement is an admission. Corresponding Law: S. 20 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Nature of admission.—The reference under Section 20 of IEA [BSA, 2023 Section 18] may be by express words or by conduct, but in any case, there must be a clear admission of the party to refer for information and such admissions are generally conclusive. Admissions may operate as estoppel and they do so where parties had agreed to abide by them, Hirachand Kothari v. State of Rajasthan, 1985 Supp SCC 17. ► Information.—The word ‘information’ occurring in Section 20 [BSA, 2023 Section 18] is not to be understood in the sense that the parties desired to know something which none of them had any knowledge of. Where there is a dispute as regards a certain question and the Court needs information regarding the truth on that point, any statement which the referee may make is nevertheless information within the purview of this Section and is admissible. 19. Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf.—Admissions are relevant and may be proved as against the person who makes them, or his representative in interest; but they cannot be proved by or on behalf of the person who makes them or by his representative in interest, except in the following cases, namely:— (1) an admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, when it is of such a nature that, if the person making it were dead, it would be relevant as between third SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 29 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- persons under Section 26; (2) an admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, when it consists of a statement of the existence of any state of mind or body, relevant or in issue, made at or about the time when such state of mind or body existed, and is accompanied by conduct rendering its falsehood improbable; (3) an admission may be proved by or on behalf of the person making it, if it is relevant otherwise than as an admission. Illustrations (a) The question between A and B is, whether a certain deed is or is not forged. A affirms that it is genuine, B that it is forged. A may prove a statement by B that the deed is genuine, and B may prove a statement by A that deed is forged; but A cannot prove a statement by himself that the deed is genuine, nor can B prove a statement by himself that the deed is forged. (b) A, the captain of a ship, is tried for casting her away. Evidence is given to show that the ship was taken out of her proper course. A produces a book kept by him in the ordinary course of his business showing observations alleged to have been taken by him from day to day, and indicating that the ship was not taken out of her proper course. A may prove these statements, because they would be admissible between third parties, if he were dead, under clause (b) of Section 26. (c) A is accused of a crime committed by him at Kolkata. He produces a letter written by himself and dated at Chennai on that day, and bearing the Chennai post-mark of that day. The statement in the date of the letter is admissible, because, if A were dead, it would be admissible under clause (b) of Section 26. (d) A is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen. He offers to prove that he refused to sell them below their value. A may prove these statements, though they are admissions, because they are explanatory of conduct influenced by facts in issue. (e) A is accused of fraudulently having in his possession counterfeit currency which he knew to be counterfeit. He offers to prove that he asked a skilful person to examine the currency as he doubted whether it was counterfeit or not, and that person did examine it and told him it was genuine. A may prove these facts. Corresponding Law: S. 21 of Act 1 of 1872. 20. When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant. —Oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant, unless and until the party proposing to prove them shows that he is entitled to give secondary evidence of the contents of such document SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 30 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- under the rules hereinafter contained, or unless the genuineness of a document produced is in question. Corresponding Law: S. 22 of Act 1 of 1872. 21. Admissions in civil cases when relevant.—In civil cases no admission is relevant, if it is made either upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be given, or under circumstances from which the Court can infer that the parties agreed together that evidence 10 of it should not be given. Explanation.—Nothing in this section shall be taken to exempt any advocate from giving evidence of any matter of which he may be compelled to give evidence under sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 132. Corresponding Law: S. 23 of Act 1 of 1872. 22. Confession caused by inducement, threat, coercion or promise, when irrelevant in criminal proceeding.—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, coercion or promise having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to him reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal nature in reference to the proceedings against him: Corresponding Law: S. 24 of Act 1 of 1872. Provided that if the confession is made after the impression caused by any such inducement, threat, coercion or promise has, in the opinion of the Court, been fully removed, it is relevant: Corresponding Law: S. 28 of Act 1 of 1872. Provided further that if such a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, or in consequence of a deception practised on the accused person for the purpose of obtaining it, or when he was drunk, or because it was made in answer to questions which he need not have answered, whatever may have been the form of those questions, or because he was not warned that he was not bound to make such confession, and that evidence of it might be given against him. Corresponding Law: S. 29 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Confession.—A statement, whether communicated or not, admitting guilt amounts to a confession of guilt. The probative value of confessions does not depend upon their communication to another, though, just like any other piece of evidence, they can be admitted in evidence only on proof. This proof is the case of oral admissions and a confession can be offered only by witnesses who heard the admission or confession, as the case may be, Sahoo v. State of U.P., AIR SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 31 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1966 SC 40 : 1966 Cri LJ 68, See also Raja v. State of T.N., (2020) 5 SCC 118. ► Extra-judicial confession.—Extrajudicial confession appears to have been treated as a weak piece of evidence but there is no rule of law nor rule of prudence that it cannot be acted upon unless corroborated, State of U.P. v. M.K. Anthony, (1985) 1 SCC 505 : 1985 SCC (Cri) 105, See also Narayan Singh v. State of M.P., (1985) 4 SCC 26 : 1985 SCC (Cri) 460; Jagta v. State of Haryana, (1974) 4 SCC 747 : 1974 SCC (Cri) 657; Sahadevan v. State of T.N., (2012) 6 SCC 403 : (2012) 3 SCC (Cri) 146. ► Retracted confession.—A retracted extra-judicial confession can form the basis of a conviction, though as a matter of prudence the courts try to look for corroboration from some independent source to satisfy their conscience that the confession is true, Abdul Ghani v. State of U.P., (1973) 4 SCC 17 : 1973 SCC (Cri) 658. See also AIR 1963 SC 1094, See also Rameshbhai Chandubhai Rathod v. State of Gujarat, (2009) 5 SCC 740; Manoharan v. State, (2020) 5 SCC 782. 23. Confession to police officer.—(1) No confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a person accused of any offence. Corresponding Law: S. 25 of Act 1 of 1872. (2) No confession made by any person while he is in the custody of a police officer, unless it is made in the immediate presence of a Magistrate shall be proved against him: Corresponding Law: S. 26 of Act 1 of 1872. Provided that when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer, so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact discovered, may be proved. Corresponding Law: S. 27 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Nature.—Section 25 [BSA, 2023 S. 23] covers a confession made to a police officer before any investigation has begun or otherwise not in the course of an investigation, P.N. Swami v. Emperor, AIR 1939 PC 47 : 40 Cri LJ 364. ► Police Officer.—The words ‘police officer’ are not to be construed in a narrow way, but have to be construed in a wide and popular sense. However, the expression “police officer” does not have a wide meaning as to include persons on whom certain police powers are conferred. The Customs Officer is not a police officer within the meaning of Section 25 of IEA [BSA, 2023 Section 23], State of Punjab v. Barkat Ram, AIR 1962 SC 276 : (1962) 1 Cri LJ 217. 24. Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial for same offence..—When more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of such persons is proved, the Court may take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well as against the person SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 32 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- who makes such confession. Explanation I.—“Offence”, as used in this section, includes the abetment of, or attempt to commit, the offence. Explanation II.—A trial of more persons than one held in the absence of the accused who has absconded or who fails to comply with a proclamation issued under Section 84 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 shall be deemed to be a joint trial for the purpose of this section. Illustrations (a) A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. It is proved that A said—“B and I murdered C”. The Court may consider the effect of this confession as against B. (b) A is on his trial for the murder of C. There is evidence to show that C was murdered by A and B, and that B said—“A and I murdered C”. This statement may not be taken into consideration by the Court against A, as B is not being jointly tried. Corresponding Law: S. 30 of Act 1 of 1872. ► Scope.—Section 30 of the Evidence Act [BSA, 2023 Section 24] envisages that when more than one persons are being tried jointly for the same offence and a confession made by one of such persons if found to affect the maker and some other of such persons and stands sufficiently proved, the court can take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well as against the person who made such confession, Govt. of NCT of Delhi v. Jaspal Singh, (2003) 10 SCC 586, ► Confession of persons not co-accused.—A confessional statement is relevant only and only if the author of confessional statement himself is an accused in a case where the confessional statement is being proved. For such admissibility it is imperative that the person making the confession besides implicating himself, also implicates others who are being jointly tried with him. In that situation alone is, such a confessional statement relevant even against the others who are accused/implicated, State of Maharashtra v. Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil Ansari, (2013) 12 SCC 17 : (2013) 4 SCC (Cri) 202. ► Confession recorded in custody.—A confession, recorded when accused is in custody, even when admissible, is a weak piece of evidence and there must be some corroborative evidence, Mohd. Fasrin v. State, (2019) 8 SCC 811. 25. Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop.—Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted but they may operate as estoppels under the provisions hereinafter contained. Corresponding Law: S. 31 of Act 1 of 1872. Statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses 26. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead SCC Online Web Edition, © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 33 Friday, March 01, 2024 Printed For: Roop Kumar, Delhi University Law School SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2024 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- or cannot be found, etc., is relevant.—Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which under the circumstances of the case appears to the Court unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases, namely.— (a) 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 expectation of death, and whatever may be the nature of the proceeding in which the cause of his death comes into question; Corresponding Law: S. 32(1) of Act 1 of 1872. (b) when the statement was made by such person in the ordinary course of business, and in particular when it consists of any entry or memorandum made by him in books kept in the ordinary course of business, or in the discharge of professional duty; or of an acknowledgement written or signed by him of the receipt of money, goods, securities or property of any kind; or of a document used in commerce written or signed by him; or of the date of a letter or other document usually dated, written or signed by him; Corresponding Law: S

Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 Act 47 PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue