Law ot tv1d c n ce Prof. Pa than's S. P.LawC!

a sscs
8 l'l
2. BI-IARA TI YA S AK S H YA ADI-I I N I YAM , 2023: S TRU C TUR E AND K EY
PROVI S I O NS . ri
a
11
Synopsi s
( l) lu troducti on
(2 ) Structure aurl Key Pl'ov isious
(3) Higltliglt ts of the Bl1al'al'iya Saksl, ya Adlt iniyam
(4) Key Issues and Analys_is
(5) I111 pol'tant Features
(6) Im portant Changes
(7) Conclus ion
(-1) IN TRODU CTION .
On August n,·
2023, th~ Bharatiy a,Sakshy a ~ii~, 2023, _w as i~tro~u ced in th; ~ok
_Sa?ha
with the intention of repeating an~ replacin g.the existing 1:1d1a11. Evidenc
e A~t, 1~7 ( ..Evidence
Act"), as well as two other Bills ai~ed at replacin g the Indian Penal
Code, 18~~ ( IPC ) and t~e
Code of Crimina l Procedu re, 1973 (''CrPC") . On Decemb er 12, 2023,
the B~aratiy a Sakshya Bill,
2023, underw ent a w ithdt awal, leading to the introduc tion of the
Bharatiy~ Sakshya (Second)
Bill ("Bill/Ev idence Bill''. ) for the·same· purp9s'e .·'the L9k Sa_bha passe~
the Bill _on D~cember 20,
2023, and the Rajya Sabha ·did the ,same.on Decemb e~ 21, 2023. It receiv~d
presiden ti al al:'p_roval
on Decemb er 25, 2023. When notified, it came b.e known as the 'Bharah
ya Saksh ya Adhimyam,
2023'. The notification was issued on 23/02/2024 and all three crimina
1st July 2024.. l laws came into force from
· . ··

(2) STRUC TURE AND KEY PROVI SIONS

0

Prior to passing of Bh,arati.y~ Saksh~a Aci_hiµiyam , the Indian Evidenc

e Act was in force
from 1st Septemb er 1872 to._ 30th June _2024. '.f'.he Indian Evidence
Act; 1872 is repealed by this
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniy am.:The _Indian Evidenc e Act.was consisti
ng three Parts, XI Chapter s
and 167 sections. The Bhartiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 consisti
ng of four Parts and twelve
Ch 9p ters with 170 sections. . .
S ECTIO N 170. )1_EPEAL AND SAVI.N G$:
(1) The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 -ishereb y repealed .
(2) Notwithstanding s~ch repeal, if; imr'ilediately before the d ate on
which this Adhiniy am
comfs into f~rce, there is any ap~lic~tion, t~ial, J nquiry, investig ation,
p roceed ing or
appeal pendmg , t,hen, such af>plication, tnal, mquiry, investig ation,
p roceedin g or
appeal shall be dealt with·und el' the provisio ns of the Indian Evidenc
e Act, 1872, as
in force immedia tely·before _such commen cement, as if this Adhiniy
into force . am had not come
. · . , ·
In the end of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adniniy am, 2023, the Schedu
le is added and two
certificates have been inserted in pursuan ce of Section 63( 4)(c) as to
admissibi li ty of the electron ic
records. This is totally a new provisio ns to. avoid confusio n as
to admissibility of electron ic
record s.
Object of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniy am:
An Act to consolid ate and to provide for general rules and princip
tria l. les of evid ence fo r fair
sses
l'rot. Path.ins S.P.La \\ Classe~ I aw o f I v1dcnce
Ey CJ

The l'Vll;'IJ('n ·, I I t lh ,111 1r;o years Ind, 111 ill '-> 1111 I
• r- ll n ,ls llllll"l' of d1•1111H l,H 'y I ( lllll Jll l' WllSI\( '
It'\ tl'\\ ol our lrtmin 111 '
. . ' ,n, ~ tllll1 t\l .irfppt tlwm 111 accord,rnn' w ,l h, h,111g111g lll'l'd" ul llw " " ' il'l \
an J .1::,p1rat1011 o l th , , 1l' I ,1 ,,• nl h- v1dence i1, acl1·ec11vL· l,1w w h1 Lh pr\lv1dl' p11m1p IL'S .in J
L plnp
11ll1l Il'::, ol pro,·11w the . , (1t · . .
n ••~ s '111L11 1,1btl1t1es given 111 lhe s ubs t.111l 1v1• l,1w

(J) HIGHLIGIIT S or Tl-IE BI-Ii\ RATIYJ\ SJ\KS II YA AD III N IYAM

(i) Tl1_: Oharatiy,1 S,1kshy,1 Adhiniyam, 2023 (13S/\) replaces th e lndi ,in f' v 1clcncl' J\cl <ii
H
1812 · re tams _thl' mc1jnri ly uf the Indi an Evide nce J\ ct's prov1 s1o nc;, 111cl ud111 g LIH>'>l
governmg contessions, foct-u al relevancy, ,1nd burd l'n ur pwuf.
'
(ii) Tl,e "T.1 d ian Evidence Act all ows for Lwo types o f evickncc· documentary and o ra l
There are two types of docu1'11,entary evidence: primary (original docurnentc;) a nd
seco'.1d_ary (documen ts that prove the contents of the original) . The Bha ra t1 ya Saksh ya
Adhnuyam maintc1ins the distinction. It incorporates e lectroni c record s Into the
definition of documents. ·
~a (i ii) According to th e lndian Evidence Act, electronic records were considered seco ndary
ce ev~dence. The Bharati ya Sakshya Adhiniyam defines electronic records as prim~ry
1e
eVJdence . It broadens such records to include data s tored in sem iconductor memory
ll, o r any communication d evice (smartphones, l~ptops).
::I)
0, (iv) In certai n circumsta nces, the Indian Evidence Act required secondary evid ence,
al s uch as when the original document was in the accused's p ossession or destroyed.
n, According to the .B haratiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, secondary evidence may be required
cI1 if the document's authenticity is called into qu estion.

(4) KEY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS

(i) The Suprem e Court acknowledged the possibili ty of tampering w ith e lec trorn c
re record s. The Bharatiya Saksh ya Adhiniyam allows for the admi ssibility o f such
Is reco rd s, but the re are no safeguards to prevE;?nt tamperi ng and co ntaminat ion durin g
·s lhe invest igc1 ti on process. Currently, the acceptance of electronic records as d ocu men ts
e requires th ei r a uthentication with a certificate. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam
mai ntain s th ese admiss ibility provisions. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhini ya m also
classi fies e lectron ic evidence as a document that ·m ay not require certifi cation. This
causes a contradiction .
(ii ) The Jndic1n Ev idence Act permitted the use of information from an accused person
il
under police custody to establish a fact. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhini ya m keeps
r
thi s provision. Courts a nd committees h~:ve observed that coercion and inad equ ate
safeg u a rd6 can lead to the discovery of facts in police cus tod y.

I
(ii i) If the accused is in police custody, the Indian Evidence Act (and the Bh,11·c1tiyc1 Sakshyc1
Ad hini ya m) permit the use of such information, but not if he was outside. The Lil\l\'
Commission reco mm ended removing this dis tinction. Severn( rcco mmcnd,1t iuns
m ade by th e Law Commission remain unimplemented . If an accused is inJurL•d while
in po li ce cu stod y, the police officer is pres umed to h ave ca used the injuncs.

(5) IMPORTANT FEATURES

Ine Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA). rcl·c1ins the mc1jurity (1t the lnd 1,1n b ·1dcnCL'
Ac!., prov1s1on s. Thi s includ es:
Law of l:.vidence IU l'ro l . l'athan 's b.l' .Law L lasses

(i) Admi ssible evidence:

r J rlic~ in .:i leg.:i l proceedin g c,1 n o nl y prc'>c nl ,1 drn1 '>!-i 1bll• t'v 1d c ncc Adm issib le evidence
is cl<1ss1Jied <1s ei th er 'lncts in iss ue' or 're lcv,rn t f,1c l<; ' I ,1cls 111 1ss L1( ' Mc ,my Lich th,1t d eter mine
the c \i s ten cc n<1t-urc, or scop e of ony ri g ht, hc1b1hly, o r d1 !-i.ibil1ty c l,11ml'd or d Pn1 ed in il lega l
procecdmr, Relcvc1nt tJ cls c1rc th ose th ot ,lrl' pl'rl 11 1L•11 l lo" p,1rl1 t 11lr1r t ,1<,(' rlw Indian Ev id ence
Act ,1lk1ws lnr Lwu types of evidence: documc nlMy ,1n d ornl.
(ii) A proved fact:
\ ccurdin g lo Lhe ev idence presen ted, n fc1cl is considered p roven w hen lhc Cou rt believes
1l c1 lh cr C\ 1.,ls or 1s likely lo exist.
(iii) Police confessions:
Confession s made to police officers me inadmissible . Co nfession s mncle in police cus tod y
are also inadmissible unless verified by a Ma gis tra le. lloweve r, if c1 fac t is di scovered as a result
of information obtained from an accused in custody, the info rm at ion m c1y be ad mitted if it 1s
clearly rela ted to the fac t d iscovered .
W IMPORTANTCHANGES
The key changes made in the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam a re as follows:
(i) Documentary Evidence:
TI1e Indian Evidence Act defined d ocumen ta ry evid en ce as wri ting, maps, and caricatures.
The Bharatiya Saksh ya Adhiniyam incorp ora tes the trea tm ent of electroni c record s as documents.
Documen tary evidence includes both primary and secon dary evidence. Th e original document
and its components, such as electronic records and video record ings, con s ti tu te p rimary evidence.
Seconda ry eviden ce consists of docum~nts and ora l accounts tha t can veri fy the contents of the
original. The Bhar atiy a Sakshya Adhiniyam m ai ntains thi s classifica ti on .
(ii) Oral Evidence:
The Ind ian Evide:mce Act defined oral eviden ce ns sta te men ts m ade by w itnesses in Court
rega rdin g a fact und e r investigation._The Bha ratiya Sakshya Adh ini ya m pe rm its the electronic
delivery of oral evid ence. This would all ow wi h1esses, accused, individuals, and v ictims to
testify viil electrc;mic mean s.
(iii) Admissibility of el.ectronic or digital record s as evidence:
Elec tronic and digital records are admissible as evi d en ce. Co m p ute r-prod u ced optical or
magnetic media, printed or stored informa ti on in electron ic rec9rd s, con sti tu tes documentary
evidence. Mu ltiple computers or different computers m ny h ave s tored o r processed such data
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyc1m states that electroni c or di gital record s have the
same lega l effect as paper records. It broadens e lectronic record s to include ·d a ta s tored in
semiconductor memo ry or any communica tion d evice (sma rtph ones, laptops). This will also
include e1'tlail records, server logs, smartphon e d at<1 , location a l evide nce, a nd voicemails.
(iv) Secondary Evidence:
The Bharatiya Saksh ya Adhiniyam exp and s seco nd ary ev id ence to include oral and
w ritten admission s, as w ell as testimony fro m a doc um ent exa miner wi th ex p er tise. The Act may
require secondary ev idence in variou s sil-u a lions, s u ch as wh en the person seeking to prove the
document is in possession of the original or h as d estroyed it. Acco rdi n g to the Bharatiya Sakshya
Adhiniyam, seconda ry evid ence m ay be req ui red if the documen t's a uthenticity is rnlled intu
quest ion .
 Prof. Pathan 's S. P.Law Classes
II Law of Evide n ce
(vi) Joint trials:

E ·d A joAint tri ed in volve nlll It 1P Ic acc used faung lh l' '>dmt' l h,iq•c· In ,1 JOll1l ·
Ina I, th c, I n d l ean
v1 'lelnbce - cl ~l1pul a lcd lhal if one accused proves a confcss1on th; l impacts the o the r accused,
It W I e LOllS1dcrcd
. . ca Con fcssion·
ag.:iinst both . The Bharali ya Sakshya J\d li iniydm provic Ics a n
exp Iana t10n tor thi s prov 1 1 1 •
. _ s on . ton e ol·. the accused hn s fuill'<l lo rl'spo nd lo a11 c1 11.l",t wc1 11• •c1n,l
tI1e Bl1a1at1ya Sakshyn Ad i1· 1· ·
< m ya m lrcats o· mull1plc-pcrson
. ·
triJ I JS ;:i ioint ·
tn n I.

(7) CONCLUS IO N
. The 1nd ian Evidence Ad, 1872 is repealed by the Bharnli yn Sa ks hya Adhiniyam and some
unport_ant cha nges are brought -by this Bharatiya Sakshya Adh in iyam . The definition o f evi d ence
Ill Se~tlon 2 (l)(e) has_ been expa nded to include any information given electronically. Thi s is a
dra_shc ~hange that will permi t appearance of w itnesses, accu sed, expe rts, and victi ms to depose
their_ evidence throu gh electronic means. Section 62 a nd 63 of Bharati ya Sakshya Adhiniyam
provide a compr~hensi~e framework for the admissibility of elecLTonic records as evid ence. As
per the changed m Section 138 now enabled an accomplice to tes tify in Court against the person
accused of the crime.

.. ~ - DEFINITIONS -FACTS SEC. 2 (F), RELEVANT FACTS SEC. 2 (K), FA CTs·.

V"' IN ISSUE SEC. 2 (G). . .·

Synopsis
(1) Introduction
(2) Definitions
(a) Fact
(b) Relevant Facts
(c) Facts in issue
(3) Conclusion

(1) INTRODUCTION
The repea led Indian Evidence Act, 1872 in Section 3 provided interpretation clause in
which the wo rds and expressions used in the senses, unless contrary intenti on ap pea red from
the context. In this Section the definition of words and expression of Court, fact, releva nt fact,
fact in issu e, document, evidence, proved, disproved, not proved, lndia, certifying authority,
etc., were given . In Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam Section 2 the d efi riiti ons are given and all
defi nitions are discusse d in this Section.

(2) DEFINITIONS [S_ECTION 2(1)]

In this Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 unless the context otherwise requires:
(a) Fact:
The definition of fact is given in Section 2(1)(£) as und e r:
(f) "fact" means and includes:
(i) any thing, sta te of things, or relation 9f thin gs, capa ble of bein ~ perceived by ~
sense's;
(ii) any mental condition of which any person is conscious .
 l'rof l'.ilhan 's S.P.LawClasses
I•"' ol L, 1dcnlt' 12

l/111~t,11tw11 ~· " l t't l,1111 p l.:iu', is ,1 f,1c1

l 111 l l(' ll ,111\ ll ll 1l' I 111
(1) Th at tlwn' .1 1t ' n' t l,1111 PbJl'' I'- ,111 ,111 1'. 1' 1 '

l 11 ) Th ,11 .:i p L'r"L' l1 lw,11 uJ l'' ..,,l\\ ..,11111t •[l1111 ,,,

P I', d l,H [
(111) Th.it a person s,ud u ·1!.11n \\llltibl,H I, .., .i t c1tts 111 vooc.J faith or
Ii\ ', , u•1l,1 111 llllt'll IC 11
I '< . n '
(t, ) That ,1 pc1M1n hL1ld s .i n' t l,11 11 ll l1 11 m 111 ' ' "L'll St' or s
1 or wa s ul c1 s pcriltcd
tr.:iudulcnth ,1r us,'s ,1 p,1rltt ttl ,11' "' 111 d 111 '1 11· 11 1ll 11 1.i 1 · · '
l1mc consc1ous ol t1 p,11 l1uil ,1r SL'lls,1li t1 11 , l!- i ,1 f,tcl . f th, I
., ..,1 111 ,, 1h 11 1f The 1nt•,1111ng o c wqrc
ln .:i genera l sense, the lL'rm l,icl nw,rn., " 11 L 1 ,., . _ , :1•ings opinion<; and s lates of
I 'll lv1,.;iblc1!1 l'>orovt'1..,ct 1
l,1d ts not Iim1teu to" 1al is l,111 ~11 e am ·
.
J

. .
' '
Ill W Lw c 1,1ss1 IC'
r· d " S -,1 1,ys ical ,
psycholooical
f _ , LI l " · reF pl:'rccivecl
' J
Tl L I ' I 1clo.; n
1rnnd which are mv1s1ble 111 n,1lure. iu s, l L ' - ' . by the five'
pus1ttve or negative. The physica l focls refer to _cx lL'lll,1 1 .ids I ,~ cl l exis t Ill the mmds of
senses whereas the psychological facts refe r to In Lerna I fa cts I lu on Y
m di ,·iduals, such as intention, fraud , good l.:ti lh, and kn owled ge. .
The e., istence at· a certam · s ta te of tI11ngs · 1·s a pos1·1·ve 1 fact , ,· th e n o n-exis tence of 1t 1s a
negative fact. . . .
Thus, the -definition of "fact" has reference to external expressio~, which_can be re~hsed or
pe rceived by the senses, and internal exp ression, of w~1ich the person is consc10u~. The mtemaJ
facts are the subject of consciousm: ,s. Thus, fac ts are ei ther physical or psycholog1cal.
(b) Relevant Fads:
The definition of the word 'Relevant' is given in sec ti on 2(J)(k) which reads as und er:
"Relevant": A fact is said to be rel evant to another when it is connected with the other in
any of the ways refei:red to in the provisions of thi s Adhiniya m relating to the relevancy of facts.
The word " relevant" means that any tvvo facts to w hi ch it is applied are so related to
each other that, atcording to the common course o f eve nts, o ne, ei ther taken by itself or in
connection with other facts, proves or renders probable the past, present, or future existence or
non -existence of the other. Relevant, strictly sperikin g, mean s ad mi ssible in evidence.
~ ~ cl.f_a cts in issue:_ . ' ·
\1/'" The definition of the word 'Facts in issue' is given in Secti on 2(1)(g) which reads as under:
"Facts in issue" means and includ es an y fact fro m which, eithe r by itself or in connection
wi th other facts, the exis tence, non-exis tence, nature or ex te nt of any right, liability or disability,
asserted or deniep in any suit or proceed in g, ncccssarjly follows . a
0
Explanation: Whenever, under the provisions of th e law for the time ·being in force cl
rela ting to civil procedure, any Court record s an iss ue of foct, th e fact to be asserted or denied in
the answer to such issue is a fact in issue.
ll/ustra tions:
A is accused of the murder of B. At h is tri al, th e fo ll ow ing focts may be-in issue:
(i) That A caused B's dea th .
'l
(ii) That A intended to cause B's death.
(iii) That A had received grave and sudd en provocation from B.
(iv) That A, at the time of doing the act which ca used B's d ea th, was, by reason of
unsoundne~s of mind, incapable of knowing its na ture;
"Facts in issue" are facts out o f w hi ch some legril right, li.:tbility, or disability involved in
th e inquiry necessa rily arises, on which, acco rding ly, c1 cl ec is1011 mu st be arri ved a t. ln criminal
cases, the charge consti tutes and includ es " (actc; 111 iss uL wlwrc-;1<, 1n Li vii casL'S, " fac ts in issue"
1
, "

an · determ in ed by the process of fr amin g issues .

 Law ot Evidence
11
lV I • l Lltllllll :"I ._, .t
1

(3) CONCLUSLON , llll rl'kvc1nl l,KL S,..1l ca n be seen

r
A llL'l 11orng through llw dct111 11 11m'> Pl l,H l, ,H Is ,111 .'i<.I, Ul , " t1 1 m1• ,1111n gs. w,1 ""
l I tlr1·butcd to
" • 1 1 1111 11
.7 , ,
1h,il no ch,111!:!,L' ,._ cHcctcJ m lhl''il' def1111l 1ons '-i,11111' ' in'i
1hcni umll-1 lm l1,1n h 11dcncc Act 1~72.

E \ lDENCE SEC. 2 (E): ORAL AND DO CUM~NTA, RY ANt

R bAL PRIMARY AND SECON DARY EY l ,DE:NC ¼ SEC
CIR CU MSTANTlAL EVIDENCE A ND DIRE CT A D IND
~id
EV IDENCE , HEARSAY EVIDENCE, PROV ED SEC.~ 0>: NOT PROVED
24
SEC.2 0)AND DISPROVED ~ 2(C), WITNE SS S I· C. 1 ·

Synopsis
(1) Introduction
(2) De.fi.ni tions
(a) Evidence orcil and documentary
(b) Real, Primary, and Secondary evidence
(c) Circumstantial e;idence and Direct and Indirect evidence

(d) Hearsay evidence

(e) Proved
(f) Not proved
(g) Disproved
•
(11) Witness-
(3) Conclusion

(1) INTRODUCTION
Some of the important definitions have been discussed in this topic though, some of the
defi nitions are not given in. the definitio.n s sections like, real prim ary, and secondary evidence,
ci rcumstantial evid_ence and direct and indirect evidence, and hearsay evidence. These provisions
are discussed in other provisions of this Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam .

(2) DEFINITIONS
(a) Evidence, oral and documentary:
Definitions of evidt=nce is given in Section 2(1)(e) of thi s 13haratiya Szi kshya Adhiniyam,
2023. It consists of two parts, i.e., oral and documentary evidence.
"Evidence" means and includes:
(i) all st~tements including statements given electroni cally which th e Courl permits or
requires to be made before it by witnesses in relation to 1T1altcrs of fact und er. inquiry
and such statements ~re called ora l evidence;
(ii) all documents including electronic or digital record s producL'd for the inspection of
the Cou rt and such documents arc call ed clocumcntary evide nce .
 l'ro l·. l'atlrnn' s ~-1'. Lawuasscs
Law of Evidence 14

(b.) Real , I'r im a ry, and Sccond;,ry C'Viden cl':

- r· . . . . 'Tcnn d iry i·v iclt•nn· c1 rc no t g iven in d e finit ions
1 110 L1C' 1n1l1n ns Pl rca 1, pn111 ,1ry, ,1nl 1 -~ .' .
section 2. Real l'vid cncc is ,1lsP know 11 t1 s prirn ,iry <•v 1d <· 111 , •.
(i) Rea I Pri m ary Ev i de n cc: . .
· · s · r..7 ( Bl11n
Real r'rim ary cv id c ncL' is di scussed 111 . l' l'i 11H1 -1 o ' ' ti y·1 ' · hyc1
' 'S·1ks
Ad h1n1yarn, 2021· ·
with seven cx pl an,-it-io ns. .
Note: This top ic will be dh!c usscd in d cln il i n Modu le 04. . _
Section 57: Prim .:i ry evid ence in c.:i ns th l' docu rnc:n l itse lf p rod u ced fo r the insp ec tion of
the Court.
Real or m ater ial eviden ce is the ev iden ce u f fac l brot1g ht to th e know led ge of th e Court
by inspection of a p h ysical object ancl nut by info rrn ;:i lin n dC' rived fr om witnesses o r docum ents,
e. g., stolen proper ty, wc<1pons, etc.
(ii) Secondary E~idence:
The defin itions of secon da ry ev iden ce is g ive n jn Section 58 of Bhara tiya Sakshya
f.\dhiniyam, 2023, \l\ihi ch are of 8 types.
Section 58: Second ary eviden ce in cJud es :
(i) certified copies given und er the provisions h ereina fter contained ;
(ii) cop ies n~ a de.frum the original by m ech anical processes which in themselves ens ure
the accura cy of the copy, and copies compa red w itl1 such copies; ·
·(iii) copies m ade from or compared w ith the original;
(iv) counterp arts of d ocuments as agai n st the parties w ho did not execute them;
(v) oral accoun ts of the contents of a documeJ1t given by some person w h o has himself
seen it;
(vi) oral admission s;
(vii) w ritten admi ssion s; .
(viii) evidence of a person who h as exa mined a d ocument, the origin~! o f w h ich consists
· of nume rou s accounts or o~her d ocu 1~ -:: nts w hi ch cannot conveniently be examjned
in Court, and w ho is skill ed in the ex.:i min a ti on of s uch documents.
Note: This topic will be discussed in detail in Module 04.
(c) Circumstantial evidence and Direct and Indirect evidence:
(i) Direct evidence: It is the tes tim ony o f a w itness to the existence or n on-exis tence of
the fa ct or fa ct-in-issue. It is ev id ence of foc t <1 ctu<1Jly p erceived by a witness w ith one
of his own sen ses. ·
(ii) Indirect or circumstantial evidence: circums tantial .evidence is tha t w h ich tends to
establish th e fac t-in-iss ue by pro_vin g ano th e r fac t, w hich, q·lOugh it d oes not i tself
conclusively estab lish th a t fa ct, aJtord s a n in fe rence as to its existen ce.
Circumstances evi d en ce is also kn ow n as in d irec t e vi den ce.
(d) Hearsay evi~ence:
It is also known as secon d-h and o r un o ri gina l cvi d t' nce. A ~v itness is mere ly re porting
what he h imself d id no t or h e.i rcl but w hat he has lea rn ed in respec t of the fact throu gh the
medium of a third pe rson. It is a s ta tem ent m ad e by a w itness of w ha t has been sa id and d t:' Cl,1n,d
out of Cou rt by a p e rson an d not bC'fnrC' th l' Co urt. ·
- / (e) Prov~d:
Section 2(J)(j) of Bh ,1r.-1 li ya Sakshy;:i /\ dhi ni y.irn, 202J which rea d s .ts unde r:
 I aw of f!v id c nr<'
I',
s. r l,llllH'~
l' rof P;i lh ,111 '~ I JW (
11,, 1r1,,tl,·rc, l)('fr,rr• 1l, lh<•
I 1s •,. 1111111 111 1111,
v, d w'11·1 1 ill, 1, 1111 • ,,1, 111,g
"Pr o ved " ,\ f. 11 1'1,11,11'rt1d,,nt rn,t n ,,ug hl,
, ,i.. 1•x1 1,111, •11 p1ol,o1l,I,
(. ( HIii l'1llwr lwlu
'Vl '" 11 111 l'\l½ I, 111 1,111 1d,·1 111 ll 11 '•" l'l"'' 1l10 11lh,!1 1l, •,1•,t',,
1111 .., t,1111 1 •,.,,1 l llw 1•,11l111rl,11, 1,, l11 ,11l11111 l, dr,u bt II l',
11 11d l•1!
ht• l1111 l''" v' d 111 y, 11111 ,, ,1• r,n,ib
\Vlw11 tl w C n111 I h1• l11 •v1••
, 11 11 1 ,., ,.,1, 11 111t •, 11 1•, 11 1•, 1•1·d 111g , tli, , Yl,.n l 11f prr, vin ~ J',
11 1,rl I" "'
' ol po,.,,., il 11 lit y 11 1 ,l t 111n 1,<,ndbl< · d,,u bi
k111n\11 ,1., Llw p1t' j1(111dl'1,ll1l< tl w ;11rll 111 IIH · ,11 , 11 •,1•il 1•, I" 111• l"" v,·d IH y111tr l n•,1
dn11 h1 , ,1 11d 8, hr•lrl
1
/11i <, 111r, / A ll< J994 S ( 191
h •
111, 011 J ll ',1.,.,1111,1\,
W, ..11- 111•11:,:ul v. <Jrl/11/
1

l11l' ( 11m l 111 S/11 /,• of r,f 11r1b l< · ma n,,, tr,
1 lw ~l1J11l' oo f lJ(' y()11d lf '.i,.,, 11, ,d,lc
d1111l1I ,1 l< ' i1',<>
llw 'l l,111 d ,ud In, 11'
th ,11111t 1111111101 c-.1scs,
' drJu bt 1~
Iii• ,1 J11p ll'J l'1(J v11 1g l)('yoncl n·w,<mabl<
1n g, llu · nrl (• ,,, 11l lwr w 1•,1·
Wh ere as 1p a civil pro u•1•d s ibrlili1•s.
ing of prn bab i lil1 l'S nn d p0H rt as the y feel
1111! nccess nry ; it is n bnlnnc di l's lo pl,1 cc Lhc ,r ,t1'>l' before· Lhc Cou
e, il is th e d uly of Lh c pn rclp van l c::v, den ce rm
ln a civi l cas ng ,di
crim in nl case , il 1s Lhl' Jul y of lh l' Cuu rl lo bri
bc'>l, wh ere as in a
ice' is clon e. ties or the
record and to see lha t just by lh c com ,ent of the pat
f evi den ce ma y be rela xed
In a civi l sui t, Lhe rule s o ev id e nce ca nn o l be re laxe d .
crim ina l cases, Lhe rule s of
ord er of lhe Cou rl, but in par ty in wh ose fov our _lh ~rc is
a pre pon d~a nce
e, a Jud ge mu st find for the a l cas e, no we igh t of
a civi l cas a cnm m
In
the evi den ce is not ent i rely free from dou bt. Jn son abl e dou bts . The
of pro of, tho ugh ich exc lud es all rea
pon der ant evi den ce is sufficient, sho rt of tha t wh
pre
pos itiv e find ing s.
def init ion of pro ved giv es
___ .- (f) Not pro ved : hin iya m,
of Bha rati ya Sak shy a Ad
def init ion _'no. t pro ved ' is giv en in Section 2(1 )(i)
The
2023 wh ich rea ds as und er: r pro ved nor disp rov ed.
fact is said to be not pro ved wh en it is ne ithe tes a
"Not pro ved ":A the par ties , wh ich ind ica
no pos itiv e or neg ativ e find ing s. It is a fail ure of pre cise ly how the ma tter
The re are on e is un abl e to say
ved and dis pro ved w h en
stat e of min d bet wee n pro
~tan ds.
~ g) Dis pro ved : of w hi ch rea d s as und er:
def init ion of dis pro ved is giv en in Sec tion 2(J)(c) s bef ore it,
The r con sid erin g the ma tter
to a fact , me ans wh en, afte bab le tha t a
"Di spr ove d" in rela tion non -ex iste nce so pro
er bel iev es tha t it doe s no l exist, o r con s ide rs ils act upo n the sup pos itio n
the Cou rt eith
er the circ um stan ces of the par ticu lar cas e, to
pru den t ma n oug ht, und ·
tha t it doe s not exist. nd sam e def init ion wh ich
wa s the rein
def init ion of di spr ove d a
The re is no cha nge in th e a Ad hin iya m, 202 3. ·
ine d by Bha rali ya Sak shy
lnd ian Evi den ce Act is reta e find ing s. 1t is con trar y to the
def init ion of
of dis pro ved giv es neg ativ -ex iste nce is pro ved .
The ~ef init ion is nol pro ved , bul its non
exi sten ce of suc h a fact
pro ved . In dis pro ved , the
(h) Witness:
ify:
Sec tion 124: Wh o ma y test Co ur l con sid ers Lh a l the
y a re
com pelL 'nl ~o test ify 1tnlt•ss th e l ans we rs to
AJI pP.rson s shall be. th em , fror n giv ing rati ona
111g Lh e que s tion s pul to
01·
pre ven ted f_rom und ers tand bod y o r min d, or any
der yea rs, ex trcm l' old agL', di se ilSL', w lwl h t'r of
tho se gues t10ns, by len d.
oth er ca use of the sa me kin om pel l'nl Lo tes ti fy, unl
ess he 1s
lan a~io n: A per son of un sou nd min d is nol inc •s t1on s pul to h im a nd g iv ing
Exp
und nes s of min d from unc.l L'rs lt1nd in g till' q11t
pr~ven ted by hi s un em . so
rn t1onal an swe rs lo th .
di scu sse d in dcl ;iil in Mod11lc 05
Not e: Thi s top ic wil l be
 l'rof. f'JlhJn '~ ',.1'.l.Jw <. lashes
La,~ 111 I, 1Jr11 ,

"l l 01\ll IL '-tlON

,1
11 1 111 iii,, lr,pri, ,1 , i1 r1 111 ., l n lh 11
\111 r , Ill) 11111111 1 I, II,, \ ,1 1d , ,11'd '"l 1 rr 1 111 21 I
., 11 Ii , Ad l11ni y,1m 20 , w 1''IPd', r,rru
"1 ,1111 d1 111 11111111-.; 111 it• I 11111 ,I 111, 111< l\'1,11 111 1 v, l ' f , L'hur ,tiy, ci 1~ I
l
Ih I
11~l.., 1... d1 1 ll ... Id o1!1t1\ l tlll '1 1111 1); 11 111 <;fl llll 11
I 111, d11l1111l111tl'i
.I
1y 1h11 Ph
I '
lty ' 1 C
'
f l '
\dl11111\ 1111 '11'1 '-tt,nH 11 1 llit• d1•l1111 l 1n11<; li t' 11nl t '< j 1 11l rll y cl<'flllf'u in l (' 1 c1 r c1 ,,1

l\dh1111\ 'Ill 21121

APPRLUAl I ON 01 · LV ID LNCr AND PRESUMPTJ ON MAY

PRC:SUML: SECT IO N 2 (l) (h ), S II A LL PR ESUME SECT J ON 2 (1)(1) A!'-.0
CONCI US I VE l' R OO l · SL:CT I ON 2(1)(b )

p
Sy 11 ops1s
(1) Introduction rl
(2) Definitions a11d npprecia t-io n of eviclence and presumption
(a) May presu m e
(b) Shall presum e
(3) Dis tinction vet-ween m a y pres um e and shall presume
(4) Classifica t ion nnd ki11ds of presumption lf
p
(a) lrrebuttable or conclusive
51
(b) R ebuttable
al
(5) Distin ction betwee11 pres11mptio11 of fact and presumption law
(6) Conclusive prvof J
(7) Ca se La ws
(8) Conclusion

(1) INTRODUCTION
Presumptions a re lh e in ferences dr<1 w n b y the C ourt during the proceeding, either onl
or crimmal. The Court e ither mc1y p res um e o r s h all presume the existence o f certain facts
The p r esumption m.:iy be ei th e r <1 p res urnpli o n _o f a fact or a presumption o f the law Some
presumption s a re reb ull ab le, w h e reas som e p resumptions are irrebuttable.

(2) DEFINIT JONS AN D A PPR EC IATIO N OF EVIDEN CE AND

PR ES UMPTION
(a) Ma y Pres ume:
The defin1Lion of 'm<1y pres um e it-> g iven in Secti o n 2 (1 )( h ) of the Bharahya Szi k ~l1\J
Adh1n 1ycJ 1n, 2023, whic h rvL1Js dL.i und L~r · ---= ,_
"May pres um e" : Wlwnevcr il i'> p ro vickd by thi s /\ dhini ya m tha t the Court m,7\ ptL'-.UffiL'
r1 i:'i, I, 11 m,1y <·1 llwi: n•g,ud 1:, uch f.ic l ,11:, p rovL•d , unl ess <1 nd until it is d isproved o r ma\ L,1 II tL11 ,1
p 10<1f of 11.
flw1t • I'> 111 , , h,ing1 • 111 ! Ill' d , ·(1111!11111 o l '111 .i y 111L•-.unw' a nd it is rl'ta11wd ,7.., 11 1-. b\ thL'
lil,,11.it1 1.1 ',,1hl1y.i J\ dh1nr y, in1 , 2021
 LaW ur r.v1aenct!
1/
· ro1. 1· a man s ::,. 1•.LaW 1...1asscs
1
In a case of "m.:i y prcsunw," ,1 Co urt h,1 s d 1isc rl'1 1011 lo pres ume the facl as p roved or 1 1 ll
to ca_
for confirmatory evidence t•I i i , l !-- lhl' circu m~. 1anccs rcqrnrc 111 s u t 11 a L cl t>l', Lhe pre!> ur1 p ll o1_ ,s
nol a hard-and-fJs l prcsumpl1nn , 1m ,1p,1bk o l rcbull.i l (. onlr.iry c<1 n be proved by the parl1 es .
This presumption 1s c.ilkd 11msc'I de /Itri/ These p,-c..., ump l1 nn " cll'l' rcbultab le
Example: Secl1 on I 1•1of tlw h 11 dc nu ' /\ll ,s ,1 h1' ncr,1l p ro vis ion dea lin g with pres ump ~i ons
of this ki nd Jnd the Courl ha" di sc rcl ion on tlw fnch ol c,1ch case lo draw s uch pres ump tion s
Presumption in itself is no t ev iden ce bu l on ly rnakcc; a 1m11in Jocic rnse for the party in whose
tavour it exists. It indicates the pcn,on on whom lhl' bu rcll'n of p roof lies. fhe Su preme Cnurl in
Sodl,i Tm 11 spo rt v . Stnte, AIR 1986 SC ·1099, held th a t w hen the ptesu mp ti on is rebuttab le, the
burden of proof to prove con tra ry is on th e pa rty who w.i nls lo prove contrary.
Section 119 of the BhJ rali yJ Sa kshyJ AJhini yc1 111, 2023, gives a legal sanction to such an
mference and, at the sa me tim e, allows the Courl di sc reti o n, e.g., sec tion 119. The Court may
presume:
The Court may presume the exis tence of any fact which it thinks likely to h ave happened,
regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private
business, in their relation to the fac ts of the particular case.
Illustration Section ll?(l)(a): That a man who is in possessi'on of stolen goods soon after
the theft is either the thief or has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he can
account for his possession. ,
The word "presumption" means things taken for granted: These presumptions or
inferences are based on the wide experience of a connection existing between two facts.
Presumptions are drawn from the course of nature, for instance, that night will follow day and
su~er will follow winter. These presumptions n)ay also be drawn from the course of .human
affaus, from the usages of society, and from transactions in business. - .
Other illush·ations of presumptions of fact are to be found in ?ections 88, 89, 92, 119, and
124.
Section 88: Presumption as lo certified copies of foreign judicial r~cords.
Section 89: Presumption as to books, maps, and charts .
Section 92: Presumption as to documents thirty years old :
Section 119: The Court may presume the existence of cert,ain facts.
Section 124: Who may testify, i.e., who may be a competent witness.
Section 1~7 ?f the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code deals with the presump.tion- of the
correctness of entnes 1n the record of nghts and register of mutations. In Anandibai Bhaska
v. Narayan, iIR 1915 Born 63, and Slrnnkarrao v. S1rnmbha Nathu AIR 1941 Born 107 1·t r
held
b that an entry 1·n th e rec~r d of ng , shall
· 11ts and a certified entry in the' register of mutations was
~res~me? to be true until the con~rary 1s proved . The preSt\mption about an entry under
12ntr)~et~ ~; is not c_onclush1ve but rebuttable . The burden of proving the contrary .or showing the
wrong 1s on t e person who disputes the entries.
~ (b) Shall Presume:
Adhin.i;~,d?ci~tion of -'shall presume' is given in section 2(1)(1) of the Bharatiya Sakshya

"Shall presume": Whenever it is dir · t db 111· Ad · • ·

a fact, it shall regard such fact as d eel e Y t s hmiyam that the Court shall presume
• . . c ' prove , un ess and until 1t is disproved .
2023. The defimhon of 'shall pres um e , is .
· retamed as .•l is by lhe Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam ,
 l'rot. l'at han 's S .l' .LawUa sses
IH
I aw ut l\tl1rnre
l rn, opt ion 1.., left Lo l 1e
J C l b I'

1 1
ut il 1~
our,
111 l,l"l'', 111 \\ hll 11 ,1 l lllll I -,h,ill j1ll' '- UITil' ' l1l l
11 .., rro VL' 1l and th e party interested
bound l l1 1,11, l· llw I.ill ,b p1t1\l'l I 1111 I 1I •\IL , , (l'11ll' J '-, c-,
C1 1VCn O l '

in d1..,p1l1, mg ii mw,I 111ndlll ,. '- Ill h i•v1d1•rn l' If lw, .in ty lo ,dduu • cv 1Jc ncr I
1 , 1 In 1llnw tlw o ppo.r.; llc · p,11 ' o Cl
lnlh1.,l..:J',l' 1lwlnt11l~\il lbl',l l 11111 y f l1n u· 1c,rrovinC11l
,., , theCour[ u
< 1
, I 11 I . . L, purly is s uc. c.cc,s u
d,.,(,WH' lhL 1,1d c,n p,c...,unwd • 1111 I lL npposi c I "c,11 ,II iw•<, um1 •" 111J1 rt1l1• !hut 0
.,Ji,111 rwt p11'...,Ut1ll' tlw l,1ll 111 I I11 · I m I 1,111 I v11 1Lill
. c ALL , I I1c wore c, •
Llw prL'...,umplwn 1lwrc111 ,., unrebulll1ble P.
· J Cnze ltc of Jncl 1c1 sha II b<· rr<'c.t I m<·c. 1 to b"
F,amplc: A dlllumenl purporting lo be Lw . < ~hall be res umed lo br· duly ,.,..,,ruted
gl'nu1 1w ,111d ,1 dl1u1nwn l Lulil'd for and nu t produced ' < P
,1nd ..:ittc..,lt>d 2 81 8 l H
u
The 1llu~lr.1l1ons ot 's hL1 !1 presume' are fou nd in seclions 78, 79, 80, 8 1, 8 , ' ' ' h, cJnd
41 m !ht> Bht1rat1y,1 S,1kshy,1 Ad hini yam, 2023 .
Section 78: Prcsumpt-ion as Lo genuineness of certified copies.
Secti on 79: Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence, etc
Section 80: Presumption as to Gazettes, n ewspapers, and other documen ts
Section 81: Presumption as to Gazettes in electronic or digital record.
Section 82: Presumption as to maps or plans made _b y authority of Government p
if
Section 83: Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of deci s ions.
1
Section 84: Presumption as to powers-of-attorney. a
Section 91: Presumption as to due execution, et~., of documents not produ ced . e
ii
(3) DISTINCTION BETWEEN MAY PRESUME AND SHALL PR ESUME ii
~
In the case of "may presume," a Court has the discretion to presume the fact as proved or
p
lo call for confi rmdtory evidence uf it as the circumstances requir~. In such a case, presum ption
ii
is not a hard and fast presumption, incapable of rebuttal, a presumption juriset de Jure .
In the case of "shall presume," no option is left to the Court, but the Court is bound to take
the fact as proved until evidence is given to disprove it, and the party interested in disproving
it, must prod uce su ch ev idence if he can. The presumption is not conclusive but rebuttable. d
In Hnradhan Mahatha ,;_ Duklrn Mahatha, AIR 1993 Pat.129, the Court has explained the p
difference between the two expressions, i.e., "may presume" and "shall presume." According to ii
section 4 of the repealed Indian Evidence Act, 1872, _w herever the exp ression "may presume " e
has been used in the Act, discretion has been given to the Court to presume a fact or rcfw,e tu tJ
raise sucb. a presu mphon . If the Court finds that it is a fit case for raising presump tion, m that
event, such facts stand proved unless and until they are disproved by the other side . According
to this section, in cases whe re discretion lies with the Court and it refuses to exercise discretion,
it may call upon the parties to prove the fact by leading evidence. In those sections where the
expression "sh al l presume, " in that event, no discretion is ,left with the Court, and there 1s a
legislative command to it to raise ·a presumption and regard such a fact as proved unless and
until it is disproved . Eventually, the question of caHing upon the parties to formc1\ly prow tilt'
document does no t arise. ·

(4) CLASS IFICATION AND KINDS OF PRESUMPTION

Pre!,,u mpl1un !,, are bro_a d ly classified into three groups :
(i) Presump tion of fact, or natura l pres umption,
(ii) Pr~sumpl1on of law,
(111) m1xl'J pn ", umpt, un~, 1.v ., presumptions o f foc t a nd low bo th
 LdW U I C.V IU ~ ll l.l:

1'1

nor . J' atna n s :, .1-.Law Lias scs

Presum ptio n of fact: the _o bsc '.va ti o ~ of the
,we infc rcnc ct- tha t a rc n.:i lura lly dra w n from 9
Pres ump t ions of l ac!
mp les a'.c give n 111 sec ti o n_11
of naru re and the con stilu l ion nf the hurr1<1n min d T he exa ti ons are pre s u mpt 1 ~ns
course und e r sec
y,1111, 202.1, dnd lhl' illu slra l1 ons
of the Bharn lly,1 S,1kshy,1 /\d h ini lhc nh ,1rn l1y,1 Suk shy a -Ac lhin iyam , 2023, a lso d ea l w ith
. Sec tion s 88, IN, 90, ,rnd 92 of
of facts ttab le.
!-,u mpt1 nns ,in' gen era ll y rcbu
presump tion s nl f,K I Thl'Sl' prc
Pre sum ptio n of law : or pro pos itio ns esta blis hed
tm1 p l1 ons nt law or nrt ifici,11 pn' sum plin ns .:ire in fere n ces
PrL'S
by lt1w
kin ds:
Pres um ptio ns of law are of two
(a) lrre but tabl e or con clus ive
(b) Reb utta ble
pre sum ptio n s of law :
(a) lrre but tab le or con clu sive se lega l rule s w hic h are not
ive or irre bult able pre sum p tion s of law are tho utta ble
, The con clus l-kn own inst anc ~ of an -i rreb
t the fac t is oth erw ise. A wel
overcom e by any evid enc e tha ya Nya y a Sap hita , 202 3, whe rein
nd in sec tion 20 of the Bha rati rs of age " .
pres ump tion of law can be fou by a chil d und er sev en yea
is an offe n ce which is don e
it is laid dow n that "No thin g t.of p resu mp tion . Sec tion s 121
, 122
ppe l are the oth er exa mpl es of this sor to be an
There the rule s of esto the esto ppe L The re is said
a Adh iniya m, 202 3, dea l w,it h
and 123 of the Bha rati ya Sak shy say that a cert ain stat eme nt of fact in nat ure
wh eth er
re a par ty is not allo wed to bel ow sev en yea rs
esto ppe l whe use d. is
or not. If in a crim inal case it is pro ved tha t the acc t the accu sed
in reality it is true wed to pro ve tha
he shal l be pre sum ed inn oce nt and no evid enc e will be allo er leas e by a m an in
in age of lan d und
ing no title obt ains pos sess ion . Thu s,
was guil ty. Wh ere a m an hav den y his lan dlo rd's title
who assu res him to give a littl e as a tena nt he can not
possession
ptio n of law is con clus ive.
it is clear that this kin d of presum
n of law :
· (b) Rebuttab~e pre sum ptio are cert ain !~gal rules,
pti on .:iris es wh en pre sum ptio ns of the law ng
. . This kind of pre sum lar alle gati on, w hich fact s bei
the am oun t of evi~ enc e requ i site to sup por t a par ticu trar y but are con clu sive
defining to the con
awa y or rebu tted by ~vi den ce
proved, may be e1th er_ex plam ed ptio n s of this kin d are def init ion s of the qua ntit
y of
of _s:1ch evid enc e. Leg al pre sum ces u nde r w h ich
m _absen ce ds of the circ um stan
pnm a Jam: case in oth er wor
evidence sufficient to m ake a · ·
opp os ite p a rty.
the bur den of pro of lies on the
Exampl es:
.
nt unti l he is pro ved guil ty.
_(a) A man is p res ume d inn oce legi tim ate, and one w h o
lock , sha ll be pre sum ed to be
Cb) A chil d, if ~o rn i~ _a lega l wed
disp rove it.
que stio ns his leg1t1macy mu s t
e 1,:mle ss the con trar y
[!
(c) ;;!~~ dd'. s bor n d urin g d ivor ce, it mu st be pre sum ed ille giti mat

g h as b een h ear d abo ut h im

t a m an .is aliv e unl ess not hin
(d) fh_e pres um ption of law tha on is tha t h e is dea d.
i
. or 7 yea rs then th e p resu mpt mp les of
116 of th e Bha ra ti ya Sak shy
a Adh iniy am, .2023, are exa
these p;:~~~n ;ti~~O~- 111 , and
Bagchi v. Sub bra_.o B ageh··1' AIR 1996 Cal . _246, the Cal cutt a Hig h Cou rt h eld
In Sm t. Giti ka on of fa t - , . n of law is ma nda tory .
tha t the pres um p ti pre sum ptio
c 18 c1iscretio n ary, wh erea s the
 (5) D I STINC TION UETW EEN PRE S UMP TI ON OF FACT AND
P R ESU M PT I ON LAW r

(1)
PRES UMPT ION O F FA CT PRE S UMPT ION OF LAW --
17,c, p rc!'., umpt 1on of"l aw is based on ti;
is
Tlw prc:-.um plt nn o l f.1 cl is bilSCd on (l) V\
logic, hum ,rn e,penc ncc, c1 nd the laws p rn v1s1on s of llw law ti'
of n.:i lu rc
p
(2) The pn'!.-, ll l1lj111 ll l1 o f Intl 18 always (2) /\ pres ump tio n o f law 1s co nLlusi; -
rebu ttilb lc .m d goes away w hen unl c'ls rebull<'d d -'> ~ro v1dcd un_d e r thP
L''\ plil 111 cd ur rebutte d by IJ1e rul e g iving ri se lo L c p rec, umpt1 on.
cslc1blis hment ot positi ve proof.
(3) The positio n of the presum ption of fact (3) The prcs ump l1 o n of Ja w 1~ re rldm c1nd
1s un certai n and transito ry . uni form in its pos ition .
(4) The Court can ignore presu mption of (4) The Co urt cannot ignore the p
fact however strong it is. pres umpti o n of lziw .
(5) The presum ptions of fac t are derived on (5) .Presum ptions of law are d e rived from
the basis of the law of nature, p revalen t establis hed jud icial norms, and they
custom s, and human experie nce. have becom e part of lega l rules.
(6) The Cou rt can exercis e its discret ion (6) c~
The presum ption of law is manda tory,
while drawin g a presum ption of ir
i.e., the Court is boun d to draw a
fact, i.e., the presum ption of · facts is b1
presu mption of law.
d iscretio nary . c~
19

Mixed presumptions:
Mixed p resump tions of law _a nd fact are mainly con fined
to th e En glish law of real pt
proper ty, so it is not necessa ry to presum e the subject here.
The Bhara ti ya Sa kshya Adhini yam,
2023, has mad e p rovisions for the presum ptions of fact and
the presum ptions of la w . In certa in
section s of the Bharati ya Sakshy a Adhini yam, 2023, it has
been p rovide d that_"the Court may
p res ume'' certain facts. In some other sections, the _word ~ "the
Court shall presum e a fa ct" have
been used . There are certain section s in which it is said that bl
a certain fa ct is conclus ive p roof
of anothe r fac t. Section 2(1)(h) and section 2(1)(1) of the Bbarati
ya Sa-kshy a Adh iniyam , 2023, OD
controls th ese section s and gives a directio n to Courts as to p1
how to p roceed under those section s
o f the Bha ra ti ya Sakshy a Adhinj yam, 2023. be
us
0 6) CONCLUSIVE PROOF pr
Sechgn 2(1 )fhtf.!f the Bharati ya Sakshy a_Adhini yam, 2023, which
.::=;== - read s as under:
"Concl usive proof" means when one fact. -is declare d by this
Adhini yam to be con clusive
proof of anoth er, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard
the other as proved , and shall
not allow eviden ce to be given for the purpos e of disprov ing
it;
The defi niti on of conclusive proof is retaine d as it is by the Bharat
iya Saksh ya Ad h ini ya m,
2023:
In fact, the re are onl y two. provisi ons under the Bhara tiya Sakshy
a Adhini ya m, 2023, that
deal with thi s kind of presum ption, i.e., section 35 and section
11 6. Sectio n. 35 is a Ju dgmen t
in rem, whi ch raisPs a concl usive presum ption. Section 35 ra
ises a conclu sive pres u mp tion in
respect of four kinds of Jud g ments, which are called Jud gm
ents in•rem.
 Law of Evid e n ce
Prof. Palhan 's S.P.Law Cl;isses 21
So anoth er p rov 1s1nn 111 llw llh,11 ,1 l1 ya Snkshya Adhini ya m, 2023, about
c_onclusiv~ proof
ra1ticc., prcc., u111p l1 nn of lcgilt macy of a chi ld bo rn duri ng marri age or
is seclinn I 16, whi ch Lhc
A ve ry stron g presump ti on 1s raised und er
wi thm 280 d.1 y<; Jfle r th e d issnlut1011 o f ma rri age.
it require <, L'q u<1ll y stru ng ,.111d Lon vincing evidence Lo 1c but <;uc h k.111d s of
tliet.t' pruv it.iom,, <111d
prcs u mpt ions.

(7) CASE LAWS

below :
Some of til e cn ses of /li e repealed J11din11 Cvidence Act~ 1872, are discussed
(a) Sudl,i Trm1 spurt v. S tal e, AIR 1986 SC 1099.
of proof to
The Supreme Court held th at when the presump tion is rebuttab le, th e burden
pro, e contrary is on the party who wants to prove contrary .
(b) A11a11dibni Bhaskar v. Naraya11, AIR 1915 Born ·63, and Shankar
rao v. Shambha

Nathu, AIR 1941 Bo_m 107.

ti on o f the
Section 157 of the Maharas htra Land Revenue Code deals with the presump
of mutation s. It was held tha t a n entry
correctness of entries in the record of rights and register
and a certified enh·y in the reg1ster of mutation s shall be presume d to
in the record of ri ghts
an entry und~r this secti on is n ot
be true until the contrary is proved. Jhe presump tion about
burden of proving the contrary or showing the entry to be wrong
conclusive but rebuttable. The
is on the person who di sputes the entries.
(c) Smt. Gitika Bagchi v . Subbrao Bagchi, AIR 1996 Cal. 246.
whe reas, the
The Calcutta Hi gh Court held that the ·p resumpt ion of fact is discretio nary
presump tion of law is mandato ry. · ·

(8) CONCL USION

is n ot evidence
Presump tions are inference s drawn by the Court. Presump tion in itself
fac ie case fo r the party in whose favoµr it exists. It indicates the person
bu t only makes a prima
tions, the contrary may be
on whom the burden of proof lies . In cases of rebuttab le presump
are e
bas_ d on wide experien ce or a connecti on existing
proved by the party . The prcs~mp tions
human affairs, the
between two _facts . Presump tions a re drawn from the course of nature,
tions of fact are also known as natural
usages of soCJety, and transacti ons in business . Presump
presump tions. Presump tions of la w are proposit ions establish ed by law .

/
 Pro

MODULE02
RELEVANCY AND ADMISSIBILITY
ol
be
lUNCH rs 0 1· RELEVAN CY /\N I) /\ IJ M l ~S I lH UTY, ADM ISS I 1:3 LE A ND ad
INAD MISSIBLE EVIDENCE S EC T ION 1 t.C

2 rI I E DOCTRINE OF RE S GEST/\ CSECT IONS tl,5,6, rL ST lDt N 'f If• I( AT IO N

PARADE SECT ION 7, EV IDEN CE O F CO MMON I NH. NT IO N Sf·, Cr l o,N
8, T HE PROBLEMS OF REL EVANCY OF 'OT IIERWI SE' IRREI LVA NT
FACTS SEC TION 9, FACTS TO DETERMINE /\MOUNT OF DAMACLc,
in
SEC TION 10, PROOF OF CU STOM SECT ION JI , FA C T S CONCERN I Ne,
STATE OF BODY AND MIND SECTIONS . 12, l3 /\ND J4 .
3. A OMISSIO NS SECTIONS . 15-21, GEN ERA L PRIN C IPL ES CONCERN INC
otl
ADMISS IONS SECTION 25
of
4. C0NrESS IONS SECTIONS . 22-24 ADMI SSIB ILI TY AND
INADMISSIBILITY OF CONrESSION MADE BEFOR E A POLICE
OFFICER , CONFESSION . ·BY CO-ACCUSED; THE PROBL EMS WITH .
THE JUDICIAL ACTION BASED ON A "RETRACTED CONFESSIO N ",
DIFFERENCES BETWEEN "ADMISSION " AND "CONFESSIO N".
e
ot
CONCEPTS OF RELEVANCY AND ADMISSIBILITY, ADMISSIBLE
AND INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE SECTION 3 IS
Pt

Qtns. (1) What is the relevancy of the fact, and what is the distinction between
admissibility and relevancy?
(2) Relevancy is the genus oj which admissibility is the species-explain.
(3) Evidence can be given of/acts-in-issue, relevant facts, and no others. Discuss which
/nets arc relevant under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
(4) What is a relevant fact? Which facts are relevant under the Bharatiya Sakshya
Ad/Jiniyam, 2023?
(5) Discuss the theonJ of relevance. Briefly classifiJ a11d enumerate the facts that are
relevnnt under the Bliaratiya SakshyaAdliiniyam, 2023.
(6) Discuss the theory of relevancy. Briefly classify and enumerate the facts that are
relevant under the Bliaratiya SakshyaAdliiniyam, 2023.
(7) 'Define 'relevant fact' and fact in issue' and bring out clearly the distin ction between
the two.
sl
Synopsis
(1) Introduction
(2) Definition of Relevance ofFacl's, Explanations, a11cl Jl/11strntions
(3) Relevancy and Admissibility
(4) Distinction between Relevancy and Admissibility
(5) Conclusion
1
 La w or 1:.v1aence
23
rrof. Palhan 's S.P.La w Classes
(]) INTRODUCT,l ON :
The parties to th e ~u,1 or prncccdm g are und er obltr,at,nn lo give C'v id cnce i.e. sakshya
ol th e n1slcnce or non-L·x1slcnce () I lhc f.1 cl m issue oncl of such o th er fac ts as are d e clareu Lu
be rclcv,rnl It mecm s th ose {,,ct., th nl arc not declared releva nt a rc excluded nnd , hence, not
JdmJl1cd Such c"\d ud cd evidence is inadmissible. 'TI1e Lcrm rel eva nt m<'a nf> log1rn l p rob ative,
c , prob,1b1litv The rul es o f relevancy declare certain facts as releva nt. '
1
(2) OEFIN lTION OF RELEVANCY OF FACT, EXPLANATIO N,AN D ILLUSTRATION S
Section 2(1) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 gives important d efinit ions used
inthis Adhini ya m.
Section 2(1)(k) In this Adhini yam, unless the contex t otherwise requires:
Relevant means: A fact is said to be relevant to another when it is connected with the
other in any of the ways re ferred to in the provisions of this Adhiniya m relating to th~ relevancy
of fa cts.
RELEVANCY OF FACTS
Section 3 of the Bharatiya_Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 provides that:
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-~xistence 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 enabie any person to give evidence of a fact wh ich he
1s d_1sent1tl ed to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force relating to Civil
Procedure. · ·
Illustrations:
(a) A_is tried for the murder of B by beatinghim 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) ~ su_itor docs not bring with him, and hav~ in readiness for production at the firs t
~anng of the case, a bond on which he relies. This section does not enable him to
P;~duc~ th~ bo~d or prove its ~ontents at a subsequent stage of the proceedings
op erwdise t an m accordance with the conditions prescribed b)' the Code of c1·vu'
race ure, 1908.
. Therefore, this section excludes ever thin th . .
Sechons 3 to 50 of the Bharatiya Saksh a Adfuni ag at is not d~clared relevant under any of
must be shown to be admissible d Y_ fyhm~ 2023. All evidence tendered by the parties
t 50 E • un er some o t e sections of th·18 Ch t II -
0 . vidence excluded by the Bharati
be admi tted merely because it may be!
a Saksh
f l r · . . . ap er , trom sections 3
~hirnyam, 2023 as admissible should n ot
fact intended to be established has to b /sendia or t e ascertainment of truth. There fore, an y
Bharatiya Sa kshya Adhiniyam 2'023 b ef ou1: to be relevant under a provision contained in the
Th f , , e ore it can be allowed to be proved.
ere ore, the Court has to ignore an other f .
3 ~o 50 of th e Bharati ya Sa kshya Adh . . y 20 act no~ falhng under the purview of section s
this Adhiniyam _. miyam, 23 a nd st nctly confine itself to th e provision s of
 ·-..
....

I ,I\\ 111 I \ 1dl't1 ll' l'rof . P,11h,111 ' . _ S. I' I ,1w c 1~sscs

C\\ RI 11 \ \ Nl \ \ N I> \I ll\ll

~~l llll l I\
"
l-:l•li·, ,1111 nw, ms lh,1 1 "hH 11 1' 11 11 I I ·( 1l(lb lhil1 l\) 1\d1111
I, ~ll • h I'' <' '· 1 I \ ' 1 lw ~ , ~1hil11 , l~ llt>lb ,11,l'll
,,n Il'~ll I,ut l'll I,1\\ ,111li .., I n, I 1 u Il's t\ l 111, I 11 I c; 11,1\ 11 1)' Ill l 111 wI 1111 1III' I i1< I., lo lw p1 OVL· d lrp
' ' , '
I
1,11,, ,l .... ,,bl l\ ,l \dlll lll\'• 1" 11 1111 11 , iui•s lion o l l l' l< ·"i111, \ 1.1., lll'<'ll di•ul
1
,1dm 1-. ... ,1,1L, 111 tlw nh,1 ' l
/\ II H l t
\\llh lll111l "l'lll lH1~ J ln t;() l1 111 11 1111 )() 1 l 11 1< I 111,II r,I ,,d ITil½Slbility
lll1tn "l'l l111n r,1 ,1 11d
1 llw nh, 11 .1 11 '" '-i.ik-. ,v,i'
t11l\ \ Jrds R1•l1•\,lllll'
1\
nw,111 ., w ld •~ (1'
, \' iy lil' p11:v1· d h1•lo11· ,I (
r,ur( 11,p
/\dli111i o1 111 '(J'"l \, 11· '-.!'<!tons
l.ll h th.ii ,1rl' ,l llll\\' L'd

ll'I (,1111 1.i,h ll'll'

lo be p rm cd,,u nd,• 1 llw llh,11
\ t,, ·~tl ,lll' L,1 lkd rcle ,·,ml f,ll'I S ni ll11· l,H ·,;:):,.J",
,1:l t.'
I lh ,il lllol \ l I
The I uf!-t ,,', 1('1( •\ dl1( y d('( l,ir;,
\' cl l1l, Jnd the rull' s ,11 · 1.
,1lI l)lt ',S l(ll I I I 'r, I 1y dn w n ,1., lo w 1ll'I 111'1 .i < 11 1,1111 1orm
,., 1d1.'lll1.' .,l,n ut .1 rclc v,:m l lad l ' ol
may lw ,1lln w l·d 11r 1•,d udl' d
\dm 1s sibi lit\ 1s llw me.m s .illll
, n'mL nll'tl u1d lll prllv 111g lhl' rl'lc
1.11 Llw Sup · Rn11 11 ·1 · v / v,in l l,H ts. J Moh d Qu,id ,m
' Cou rt m 1 vi wn ifll av S t1t 1 • ,1fl Jil1 nrA IR1 99B
lh.m ollL' n the c ,p ress ions 'rele v £ . SC l 850,•,,11dthc1t , mor e
vanc y" an d \ 1d1111 ss ibil1L y' tHl',
1mplic.11 ions cUl' diff eren t beca u sl'd as syn o n y':n" ' bL:l thei
use focl s LhJl a rc rclt> vJn l mJ r ~egal
com m umc otio n mad e by a spo y not bl' <1 d m ic;<., ihl t, for l x<1m
u se duri n g 111 ,:tr_riJ_gc a nd th e pl<.:, the
Lmd his clien t, thou gh rele van com mu11 1 ct1l1on betw een ,dn advo cate
t, are not ad1r nss1 blc . ln the
ma) not be rele vant , e.g., que sam e ~ay, fact s lh a t an c1d~
stio ns perm itted lo be cros 1ss1blt'
imp each Lhe cred i t of a wib1 s-c~,.ir~1111ccl Lo tes t the vera
ess, thou gh not rele vant , are city or to
adm issib l e.
The Bha ratiy a Sak shy~ Adh iniy
aiI1 , 20~3 exh aust ivel y e num
kind s of casu al conn ecti ons e rate s in sect 1ons_3 to 50 the
that mak e .a fact lega l and re
e , amp les of the excl usio n of leva nt to ano ther . The foll owi
logi cally rele van t facts by pos n g may be
itive rul es of law:
(i) excl u sion of oi:al by doc ume
ntar y evid ence ;
(ii ) csto ppe l;
(i ii) priv ileg e com mun icat ion
.
The re is a diff eren ce betw een
rele van cy and adm issib ility
rele va nt, but all rele vant evid . A ll adm issi ble evid ence 1s
ence is not nece ssa i:ily adm issib
prov ed by the prov isio ns of le. All fact s .tha t are allo wed
the Bha ratiy a Sak shya Adh iniy to be
fact ma y nol be adm issib le unle am, 2023 , are rele va nt, but a
ss it is allo wed to be prov ed rel eva nt
th e rele vanc y of fact s is of two by th e prov i sion s of the law Thu
kind s: s,
(i) logi cal rele vanc y, and
(i i) lega l rele vanc y .
A fac t is said to be logi cally
rele vant whe n it bL·,1rs s u ch
o ther so as lo rend er prob able a cas u a l rela ti ons hip with the
exis tenc e or non -exi sten ce of
rele vant to a noth er only whe th e later . One fact is said to be
n it is conn ecte d with the othe lega lly
3 to 50 of the Bha ratiy a Sak shya r in ;:my way , as refe rred to in
Adh iniy am, 2023 . sect ions
Rele vanc y and adm issib ility
are not co-e x te n sive . Stri ctly
adm issib ili ty are not tl:e _sam spea king , rele vanc y and
e thin g. Adm issib ility is ~oun
Bha rat1 ya Sak shya Adh 1rny am, ded on la w a nd not on logi
2023 decl ared the follo w1n g c The
nu othe r- seve n facts alon e to be rel eva
nt ,.md
(i) Clos ely conn ecte d facts (Sec
tion s 4 Lo 14) .
(11) Adm issio ns (Sec tion s 15-2
1 and Sect ion 25 ) and Confl'SS
(J11 ) Stat eme nl. by the pers ons
1on (SL•ct,orn, n-2.-1:) .
who ca nno t be ca ll e d as w1tn
(1v ) Stat eme n ts mad e und e r essL'~. (Sec tions 26 and '2"')
spec ial circ um s ta n ces (SL'C lion
(v) How mu ch of sta le m e 11l s 28 lo 3'2)
is t·o be prov ed (Sec tion JJ)
(v1) Judf irn l·n l of Hie Co urt
whe n re leva nt (Sec ti o ns J4 1
(v11) Op1111on of Ex pert ~ (Sec 0 JH)
tion s 40 lo o.15)
(1x) (hc: iract er w h en re leva nt.
(St'c l1on s 11( i l, l SO)
ses f ,1w ol I v1 dt•n,<'
,r,
rwl l'Jlh ,1 11' ~ I' J ,l\\ l J l'Sl'S

(,ll Pl ~ I I NC I ION Bl I \VU N RH I V/\N( \ /\N II /\ llM

l',', 11111 1 l'Y
l'd A l >M l 'lS IUII.I I Y
i re Hl •I I \//\NC)
alt 1\d ni1 o.;o., dlllil y 1.s 1101 lii1 •,1•d 1111 lr1g11 li11i
\ll 1,l'h·, .im \ 1.s b,1.sL·d \lll log1t ,111d p1oli,1hil1 ly
ih
he
t1n sl 111 I 1ul1 ·, o l l,1w
--
lit• 11d 1•o., of ,1d111 1•,•, 1liil1I y II I' 111••,1 1 ii 11·1 I
1
flo- I lw 111lt''- ,11 1t•I,,,.,111\ \ ,1 1t' dL'SL I ilwd 111'-l't I1111 1.,
y,1rn, ,1111 ·1 S('l 11011 r, 1or IIH' lllio1ri1t1 y,1 C.,,dn,IJy,1
1!(' 1 l11 'il) 11I tlw nJ1,11,11Iy ,1 ~.ikRhyn Adh111i
01 202, . . /\ dh1 111y,1111, 2()21
1 lw I Iii (' or ,1t l m1s.s 1hil1iy 1111',Ill', tl1,1I d
flw ruk-, ot n' lt'\ anq d1'd,1rp w h,11 ici n•ll'v,111 1
Co url 1L111 pc-rm1I C'Vid1·11cc to bt g1v1·n
an t11b1' pnnl'd
Ji~ or d r,1d on ly ,r ii is n·lt·Vdlll
~.,J ility 1s the mec1nc; vnd method
11e t\ccordm g lo t11e Bhara liya Snkshya Admi ssib
rules of re levnncy lll C'a n lo prove the rc: levpnl rc1ct vnd to keep
ate ,\ dhm i)'a~n 2023 the
the ev id e nce limited lo lh l' relevan t f<1ct
ole rl'k, ant .eviden ce. They mny be nd missible or
to no! .
a rc adm1ss1ble are
(5) The facts Lhat are relevant are not necessar i ly The fa cts which
:he adm issible. necessar ily re levant.
be
(5) CONCL USION
rul e as to the to the
Section 3 of the Bharatiy a Sakshya Adhiniy arn, .2023 g ives a cardinal
of the fact. It provides that evide1i.ce may be given o r facts in iss ue and a relevant fact
releva ncy
of facts from secti ons 3 to 50 to
The Bharntiy a Sakshya Adhiniy am, 2023, declared seven groups
is adm issible. The facts
~ is be relevant and none other. The rule of relevanc y means that evidence
be le are n ecessaril y relevant, butthe facts that are rel evant ma y n o t be necessa rily
Iha! are admissib
ant
admissible.
us,

4, 5, 6, TEST
THE DOCTR INE OF RES GESTA E SECTIO NS
OF COMM O N
the lDENT IFICAT ION PARAD E SECTIO N 7, EVIDE NCE
TION SECTIO N 8, THE PROBL EMS OF RELEV ANCY OF
ally INTEN
9, FACTS TO
ons 'OTHER WISE ' IRRELE VANT FACTS SECTIO N
10, PROOF OF
D ET ERMIN E AMOU NT OF DAMA GES SECTJO N
SECTIO N 11, FACTS CONCE RNING STATE OF BODY AND
CU STOM
MIND SECTIO NS . 12, 13AND 14.

Synopsis
(1) in troduction
(2) Relevancy of fact
(i) Evidence may be given of facts in issue a11rf releva nt fact
s. (Scctio 11 3)
(3) Ciosely connecte d facts
(i) Relevan cy of facts fanning part of sa me trm, sact iu11
. (Sec t io11 4) (/<cs Gcstac)
(ii) Fa cts w /1ich are occasion , cause or effect offa cts i11 iss111' or rdc1>n11t Ji1cts . (St'ctio 11
5)
(iii) Mo tive, prrparntio11 a11rf prev ious 01· s11/1s1•q11c11/ r o11r/11 r /. (Scctin 11
t,)
 Prof. Pathan's S.P.Law Classes
2'1 l' r<
Law of Evidence
.. . , rad in iss 11 ,, or rc/eVtwt facts . (Section 7)
(i·v) facts 1/t'Cl'SS lll"lf In l'X/1111111 (II 111/1111/llrt I' . . ,
· . · , ,r,,n•nr,· lo cnmmo11 dr•,:;1gn. (Section R)
(v) Tl1i11--: s soi,/,,,. ,/0111' /111, 1111 s 1111·,,tor 111 ",,
, . IIH' rcf,, 1,n11I . (Scctin11 9)
· "< 0
•
(11i) Whc11 fi1cf ~ 11111 otl1,·r11,1.~,· n· 1n 11111 11
L
.
- ,1 , 1 in , ,111101111 1 nrc relevant in suits for
(1.>ii) F11cts tcmli11g 111 c1111/1l,· l 011rl lo , 1 1 r 11 ' 1 Ir •

,fo11111gcs. (Scctio11 HI) . . .

111
·· · I · 1 . . -1
(1•111) Facts rl'f,,11,111/ w 11' 11 rig,, 01 , 11 s 0111 ' ·
·.,; 11 ·,n1l(''>lir111.(S,•rt1onlf)
· · · · 1· · / , f lmcl11. or t,udily I'feeli11g.(Sec
(1x) Facts slwwrng ,•.n slc11c,• oj sl11/1• o 1111111 , 01 0 . .
tion 12)
.
(x) Facts bc11ri11g 011 q11cstio11 whether act wns arrirlc11tal or i11tent,onal.(Sec twn 1.J)
(xi) £xis ten re of course vf /111si111•ss 111l11·11 rclc1 I1111 I. (Sccf ion U)

(3) Concl11sio11

(1) INTRODUCTION
Sections 3 to 50 of the Bharatiya Sakshy,.1 Adhiniyc1m, 2023 deal s with the _p ~ovision s of th -
relevancY. of facts in Part 11, Chapter II . Section 3 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhrn1yam, 2023, lr J

provides for a cardinal rule that evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence c, p
or non-existence of fact in issue and of relevant fact and no other. These relevancy of facts are th •
enumerated from sections 3 to 50 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 . b<?
. The first Part of the relevancy o{ the fact deals with closely connected fact which are
enumerated from sections 4 to 14 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 . . Th
'IV .
or
(2) RELEVANCY OF FACT res
(i) Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant fact_s. (Section 3): to
Evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence or non-existence of n~
every fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no p r,
others. I:,

f f2 ·
Explanation: This section shall not ~nc1ble any person to give evidence of a fact which
he is disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force relating to civil
I ell
procedure. ·
!IT.
Illustrations: cJC I
· (a) A is tried for the murder of I3 by beating him with a club with the intention of causing tb t
his death. . th,
At A's trial the following facts are in issue: Hf
A's beating B with the club; be,
A's causing B's death by such beating;
A's intention to cause B's dec1th.
mt
(b) A su_itor does riot bring with him, and have in readiness for production at the first
hearmg of the case, a bond on which he relies. This se<;:tion does not enable him to
produc~ the bo1:1d or prove its ~ontents at a_ subsequent stage of the proceedings,
otherwise than m accordc1nce with the cond1hons prescribed by the Code of Civil pL
Procedure, l 9U8.

.t r<
 I ,1w of I v1dc n cc
~ ~ I' l .1w Cl.1•~~• !.7
rw1 l'J lh ,m
(3 1 C l O S EL \ C () N N I l r r I l I At I 'i
· • 1· (~ •ct1on ti) (/fr •, C,, .., /,11') :
') R I
(I ·f
ol ,lcl ll lnr1111n ~ p ,11 I of S,lllll'
l' L'V ,lll C)' 11,lll S ,H 11111 • 1
,, 111 , 11 ,1 11·h•v,111l l ,11 I ,1s
I w rl I1" I•11 I 111 1 '' I
I .1d:-- wl11d1 IIH,u µ h 11111111 1ss 111 • ,1 1l ' s1 11111 11w1 l1•1 11111 1111 1< ' .irH ,
w lw ll wr i lil'y 1H 1 111 l l d ,ii llw '· '
111 1111111 ,,,11 I 111 llw s, rnw l r,ms,H li111 1, ,11 1• rl'11 •v.r11l
11l.1u• l ll ,11 d1ll1•1\'n l tinn's ,md pl.1 1·t•s
ll/11strtllio11s:
· :I · 1 , WI1,1l1·v 1,, w ' ,., ,." 11d or. dorn · by/\ 01 13
(,1) t \ ts ,KL'uSeL o l I w munl1'1 ' nl I\ hv lw11l1111•, 111111 th e
t· 1 11 c1s lo for m jh trl o(
or llw by s l,1nd crs n l tlw lw,1 l1ng , 11 1 Hl> shurll y lw ln n • 111 ,ifl
lr,1ns,teliL1n, is a l'L'kv,1 nl l,lL' I.
lrum B Wl'r~· Lit-liV<'r<'cl lo /\ The
(d) l'l1l' qul'stio n is, whe llw r Cl'rl,iin gnud s o rd l'rl'd ry is
goods were delivere d Lo SL'Vcrn l ,inlcrnwdic1l L' pe rsons SLH'l'L'SS IVL'ly f·'. ,H h delive

., relevan t foct.
rder of hi s wi fe. f li s defence was
ln Ro ttc11 v. Q11ee11, 1971, a m an was pros\·cult•cl ror them LI
off acciden tally . There wns evide nce lo the effe<;L lh nl th e de~ease d telepho ned
th.:i t the shot went
the opcrn lo r cou ld connecl the pol ice, the _caller who
I, lo s,1y, "Get me the police, please." Before
e distress gave her address , and the call s uddenly ended . Thereafl.Qr, the police came to
spo~e in
and the words s he s poke we re held to
e the house and found the body of a dead woman . Her ca ll
her death.
be relevan t as a part of the transac tion, which brough t about
which govern s ev ide nce admiss ib le.
'e '---'RES GESTAE: Section 4 embodi es the res gcsl'ne rule,
a to
deal, action, or the nrnin point of a case that should be the part of
This phrase only refers
by the rights or duties that are being argued
wha t really happen ed in the world' that was caused
about in the case. People sometir nes refer to the princip le underly in g Section 4 as
or compla ined
of evidenc e. There are two w~ys
res gcstne. The·phr ase "res gestae" is well establis hed in the law
phrase. In its narrow est sense, it refers to the events that occur in the world that give
to use this
issue. In a broader sense, it re fers to all of the probati ve facts used to
of rise to the right or liability at
e from a witness or the Court's percep tion
0 present res ges tne to the tribuna l when direc t evidenc
gestae, in its narrow est sense, refers to the concept of a person 's action that
1s unavail able. Res
to enforl'e liability for . To be cl ea r, in the narrow
results in the effects that the action seeks
:h
"facts which constitu te .the res ges lac must be so conn ected with the very transac tion or
sense,
ii act or sequen ce of ac tions that either
fact under investig a tion as to constitu te a part of it." Any
tes the res ges lne . The main act that the
immedi ately precede s or ends al an y g iven tim e constitu
the beginni ng lo the end, along with any thing said by either party during
accused is doing from
the victim (even if the accused is not present during
,g the transact ion, includin g anythin g sa id by
or the victim), is part of the main transac tion and can be used as· evidenc e as res gestae.
the action
not res gestae and should be thrown out
Hov, ever, stateme nts made by the compla ining party are
1

and time has passed.

because the actions of the wrongd oer have stopped
The acts and declara tions accomp anying th e transac tion or the facts in issue are treated as
d in evidenc e, but the fact deposed mu s t form part of the transac tion and
res gestne and admitte •
act immedi ately after il.
m u st be made at the same time with the
Evide11c e /\ct, 1872, nre discuss ed below:
rst Some of the cases of the repealed lndin,i
Pal v. State, AIR 1955 All. 328, defined the
Ito (i) Allahab ad High Court in Mal1e11drn
es, was commit ted by a numbe r of persons apart from the decease d and
place where a murder
\•Vl're informe d bv the eyewih 1esses
.. ii eyew itnesses. Those persons came up imm ediately a fter nnd
who the two cu lprits had been. The stn lernenl s of those pL•rsons were hcid to be admiss ible
as to
under section 6.
 Prof. Patltan's S.P.Law Cla
28 sses
Law of Evidence 11 h Id th t ·
. . , A IR 1957 SC 2 , e a m a case of
(ii) The Suprl'm t' Cn url in l'rrshndt v. Slal c, ,. ·li e r he ld o ut a threat to the victim, told
I •
murder, soon a ft e r tlw m1iruL'r, t lL' ,H r usLL, .
J , , ·I w ho hac 1cd l I . d . "bl e und ,
. .. ,re o f th e ;:i cc usec, 1s a miss1
the folh L·rofthl' v ictim Iii.ii lw h,id .i 11 ,llld in thr s a ppc,,, ., , er
section 6 of the lndi ,111 1·'. vid l' llL'C /\c l. AIR 1965 SC 1179 h eld th t h
. .. , , . . ; D 1'. Me s1tram, . , a t e ti
(m) Thl' Suprcm l' C nurl Ill P1111111 111 nv ~- · 1 , C is le lo Bucldhrs m may be corroborated d
evid ence of tlie con ve rsion of ,1 nH'llllw r uf ll ll' SdiC'L ll 1LL 1 .'
b y ti1e evid . - J b I t hi s convc rs10n . 0
en ce ol· hr s co nt1u ct su Sl'CJll Cll u . · AIR 1985 SC 1268 h Id .
. , . Cl 111 d11'. K fa v Ram t<,s 1,an, , e that
(tv) The Suprem e Court 111 ,1" n ,· ., latlvc o f th e deceased and he deposed ti
when the complainant na rr.i tcd the 1nc1Lknl lo ~hi •~ 1o
that effect in Court, such ev idL•n ce is ndmi ssibl e 111 eviden ce. . . C,

(v) Patna High Court in Sl1y11111 Na 11 dall . ~g '." :

s· / 11 The State o/Bthar, 1991 CRILJ 3350, held
at th e scene of the occurrence, he se
ti
tt
that F.I.R. is a res s cslae. In thi s case 1f a wrln ess rs P' ese nt h ff b . . es
. '. d I s cry about t e·O ence el
the whole occurrence from beg mnrng to en , ma <e ' a d th emg ft · c;ommitted
.
· • · reac I11·t, te II s ti , e stor·y of the.occurrence,
w l1en peop Ie f rom tI1e v1c1111ty Than k'en a f er thsome tune
goes to the police station and registers the First Information Report. _e ma mg O e report is a<
part of the transaction, so it amounts to res sestae. The fact that some lime has elapsed , between P'
the occurrence and the report is immaterial. · in
(vi) Arvi11d Ku1nar v. State of NCT, Delhi, AIR 2023 SC 3653 w
. ·· Supreme Court held that an accused went near ?eceased on ~ei~g instructed by Sub- of
Inspector of Police to go to deceased and to prevent hnn fr?m con~mmng use of te_lephone.
h,
It was reaction or action of deceased which resulted in carbme getting entangled With chain
attached to belt of accused which Jed to accidental fire from carbine. Theref9re, ac;cused fa
spontaneously reacted by telling Sub-Inspector of Police what she has got done fro1:1 him. h2
While implementing direction, accidental fire took place and accused became responsible for
death. Statement of accused to which section 6 is applicable cannot be treated as confession of
guilt. However, statement becomes relevant ·and can be read in evidi;mce as it shows conduct of
accused immediately after incident. · to
(ii) Facts which are occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue or relevant facts (Section 5):
ba
Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect, immediate or otherwise, of relevant facts, Al
or facts in issue, or which constitute the state of things under which they happened, or whidi
aCl
afforded an opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevanf.
an,
Illustrations: .
fac
. (a) The questio_n is'. whether f:.
r~bbed B. ~he facts that, shortly befbre the robbery, B
went to a fair w•th money m his possession, and tl1at he showed it or mentioned the
fact that he had it, to third persons, are relevant. ' ·
liq1
(b) The question is, whether A murdered B. Marks on the ground, procfocedby·a struggle sta
at or near the place where the murder was committed, are relevant facts.
dis
(c) The _question i~, whether A poisoned B. The state of B's health before th~ s toms
ascribed to poison, and habits of B, known to A which affo d d · · ?:1Pty f
the adminisJration of poison, are relevant facts . , . r e an oppor ru or Jae
, Section 5 deals with the varieties of facts such as those t.h t ti ' · h · ,.
· f ·d h · f ' c a cons tute t e occasion or
c~uset oTh?r prot~1 etht e opp<:'drtu .,f1ty or the happening of the facts in issue or that show their
eaec . 1s sec 10n us prov1 es m the relevancy of the f0 JI · k" d , '
. facts constituting
(1) ·. . the owmg m s of facts:
occasion;
(ii) facts that show the cause;
(iii) the effects of prrncipal facts;
(iv) facts, which' p ...ovide the opportunity for ti) I .
(v) facts that cons titute the state of thin s L e. .1appenmg
.
of pr'inci pa l f_ac t.s,· an d
g mdei which the principal facts happen.
 l ,I V\I UI LV JU t.:IILl

I ._11111111 :, J.J • • O\"W '- lll "'ll~l -,

So111c of //1, · 111111111 /1111/ , i,.,,.., "I ,,,1 ' I '"'""'" ' " " " " '
, I 11 11(1 •111 ,. 1\1 I, I H72, (If{' tliS ( II SSt' d

/11'11111': I li t, <'I 11I i 11 1111w,l.11H ,..., th.it c on <; L1tuled

OCCAs l()N : I ,,, I,.,,,,.,, 111 ,ii\\ ,1\" , '11I • )'' 1I \ I'llI I)I I<I v' J</,/1,11·,l., 1111 17c:;8, tlw f,Hl Lh .:it LiI e
lltt• Ull,l"tllll l(H" IIH' h,1pp,•n1ng nl ih, · 1111111 I'" ,11 '11 . I ,•l1 •v ,;11 ,, ,1 rr, 11•, l1lu l1•d lh t•
11 I I I I II' I II 11( . I) 11 ll II ( I ' I I I '
dl'll',1St' d p, 111 \\,l/; ,1Illlll ' 111 Ill I I (1 " / ; ' ' '
p 11 ,1sH111 IPr llw mu1dc1 f
I I II '' •I 11 1 ( 111 1111 1',i.t ll f I", 111,11 I (111 ',illlllt I 1II' f dl l ',f' I)
tl lAUS L . l·v 1d1•1111• 1,11 1 wgl\1•11 11 H ,1 I II IHl,•➔ 111< (rn 11I
11w 111mup,1l l,ILL Thl' L,lW ,1' nl l1·~1 ,•,q 1l11 111 ·1 w l1 y" 1,i11l1; '111111 ,"1\r'/,~1 ~'i'c:,,\'';~ y" p1•,..',o,1 whr, ht1d
i1111wd tlw pcrsl1n w 1lh the '11 I I lw , 11 I 111 qt11 ", l11111 ,111, . , i.r v, I II I I
;,w 1 ,rn.,L' lnr 11 ln l111li,111 \ 11/1111•.., v J\ 111,f/1111 ·1 ( /1, 11, rll,, · 1, JCJ61j, ( ,il c
11 1 1111 ' 1 I l,gfh ( ~,"r l H' ' 11 "
till' rq10rl of lhc lnquir) C.~ 01111111 .,., ,1ll1 11• I,111111•, 111 ,111 ,111· 1 , " c, I, ,,' n• lr·v, 111' 111 11 1·r ,r•< 111,n 7 ", 11
j , .,1,1blishes the cause of the ,1cc1d,·11l
EFFECT: Every c1 cl k ,1ws lw l111 1d 11· rl. 11111•lf, •c lf-. 11 1,11 nol only n·r ord II H· hc1p1J('ntng r, f the
.:icl but also lhrc.:n,v light on Lhc 11c1lu rL' ol Lill' ,, ct; for t•xc1 111pl~•, whet her l~ t· det1th of.ct ~arti cul ,H
pen,on wc1s caused by suicide Llr by murder is oLLen cle lerm111ecl by looking at ~he effects of thP
mo dents because for mu rder a11 d s u icide lhl'l'l:' ml' c.l ilfr rl'nl effl'ds. In R. v. Richard son, l758,
where a young girl was ki lled in her co llage, the prin ls n f foolslepi-. s howed that they were th~se
ol a person who must have worn shoes, the soles of wh ich had been newly m ended and which
had irnn knobs or nails in them .
)
OPPORTUNITY: The circu ms tances th at prov ide an opportunity for the happening of a
fact in issue are relevant. Opportunity shows th at th e ac t m ust have been cl o ne by som eone who
rr had the opportunity to do it.
Illustration: The question is wheth er A p oisoned B.
t The st~te of B's health before Lhe sy m.p toms ascribed to poison and the habits of B known
lo A, which afforded an opportu nity for the ad mini s tra ti o n of p oison, arc re levant facts.
STATE OF THINGS: The fac ts, w hi ch cons ti tute th e s ta te of things under which or in the
background of w hich the prin ci pa l fact~ happened, me rclcvc1nt. In Ralten v. Reginam, 1971 [3]
All.E.R 801, the accused was prosecu ted for shoot ing d ow n his wife, an d he took the defence of
accident. l11e fac t th at the accused was unh appy w ith hi s wi fe and was carrying an affair with
ano ther woman was held to be relevc1 nt c1s it· cons tituted th e sta te of th ings in which the principal
fact, i.e., the shoo ting dow n, happe ned . ·
In Sta te of Haryana v. I<rishan, AIR 2017 SC 3125.
Supreme Court held tha t w itn esses su ffe rin g co nsequ en ces of consuming spurious
liquor specifically s ta ling th at they hc1 d purcht1sccl it fr om vend s of resp ond ents . Contemporary
statemen ts of wib1esses who s uffe red loss of eye-s ig ht imm edi a tely a fter inciden t cannot be
disbelieved. Such- statements also beco me re leva nt und er sec tion 7 and ad m issible in evidence.
Qtns. (1) A ny fact is relevant if it- shows Ot' cons ht-lites a motive or· prepara tion for any
fact in issue or relevant fa ct. Explain. ·
(2) What is meant by motive ? Wlt eu w ill it 1,ecome relevant?
(iii) Motive, preparation and previous or sub sequent conduct. (Section 6):
(]) ~y fact is releva nt w hi ch shows or co ns lilu tes a mo ti ve or prepc1ration for ,c1ny fact
1n issue or releva nt fac t.
• (2) !he conduct of any pa'.·ty, o r 01, t1 ny_c1gc nt lo any pc1 rty, to c1n y sutl or proceeding,
m reference lo such s url or p,•ocel'dm g, o r 111 refere nce to ,1 nv i.ict 111 is<.ue therein
or r~Ievant Lhcrelo, an ~I lh ~ co ndu ct ol any perso n, an oftencl' agamst ""horn 1s the
subject o_f any proceccJ ,n g, l h rl' lcv,, n l, ii hUC h co nduc t influl'nccs or(', 111llucnc1..'d Q\
any fact m tb~Ut' or rclc>v;i nt l,1c1 , ,111d wlw tlw r ii w,1 <.;; prl'vinu ., Ill "llb'il'l) lh.'nt lhl'rL'tl,