Section 1 (Old Corresponding
Sec.1 IEA,1872)
Short title, application and commencement.
Section 2 Definitions.
PART II
CHAPTER II
RELEVANCY OF FACTS
Section 3 (Old Corresponding
Sec.5 IEA,1872)
Evidence may be given of
facts in issue and relevant facts.
PART II
CHAPTER II
CLOSELY CONNECTED FACTS
Section 4 (Old Corresponding
Sec.6 IEA,1872)
Section 5 (Old Corresponding
Sec.7 IEA,1872)
Section 6 (Old Corresponding
Sec.8 IEA,1872)
Section 7 (Old Corresponding
Sec.9 IEA,1872)
Section 8 (Old Corresponding
Sec.10 IEA,1872)
Section 9 (Old Corresponding
Sec.11 IEA,1872)
Section 10 (Old Corresponding
Sec.12 IEA,1872)
Section 11 (Old Corresponding
Sec.13 IEA,1872)
Relevancy of facts forming
part of same transaction.
Facts which are occasion,
cause or effect of facts in issue or relevant facts.
Motive, preparation and
previous or subsequent conduct.
Facts necessary to explain or
introduce fact in issue or relevant facts.
Things said or done by
conspirator in reference to common design.
When facts not otherwise
relevant become relevant.
Facts tending to enable Court
to determine amount are relevant in suits for damages.
Facts relevant when right or
custom is in question.
Section 12 (Old Corresponding
Sec.14 IEA,1872)
Section 13 (Old Corresponding
Sec.15 IEA,1872)
Section 14 (Old Corresponding
Sec.16 IEA,1872)
Facts showing existence of
state of mind, or of body or bodily feeling.
Facts bearing on question
whether act was accidental or intentional.
Existence of course of
business when relevant.
PART II
CHAPTER II
ADMISSIONS
Section 15 (Old Corresponding
Sec.17 IEA,1872)
Section 16 (Old Corresponding
Sec.18 IEA,1872)
Section 17 (Old Corresponding
Sec.19 IEA,1872)
Section 18 (Old Corresponding
Sec.20 IEA,1872)
Section 19 (Old Corresponding
Sec.21 IEA,1872)
Section 20 (Old Corresponding
Sec.22 IEA,1872)
Section 21 (Old Corresponding
Sec.23 IEA,1872)
Section 22 (Old Corresponding Sec.24/ 28/ 29
IEA,1872)
Section 23
Section 24 (Old Corresponding
Sec.30 IEA,1872)
Section 25 (Old Corresponding
Sec.31 IEA,1872)
Admission defined.
Admission by party to
proceeding or his agent.
Admissions by persons whose
position must be proved as against party to suit.
Admissions by persons
expressly referred to by party to suit.
Proof of admissions against
persons making them, and by or on their behalf.
When oral admissions as to
contents of documents are relevant.
Admissions in civil cases when relevant.
Confession caused by
inducement, threat, coercion or promise, when irrelevant in criminal
proceeding.
Confession to police officer.
Consideration of proved
confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial for same
offence.
Admissions not conclusive
proof, but may estop.
PART II
CHAPTER II
STATEMENTS BY PERSONS WHO CANNOT BE CALLED AS
WITNESSES
Section 26 (Old Corresponding Sec.32
Cases in which statement of relevant fact by
IEA,1872)
person who is dead or cannot
be found, etc., is relevant.
Section 27 (Old Corresponding
Sec.33 IEA,1872)
Relevancy of certain evidence
for proving, in subsequent proceeding, truth of facts therein stated.
PART II
CHAPTER II
STATEMENTS MADE UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
Section 28 (Old Corresponding
Sec.34 IEA,1872)
Section 29 (Old Corresponding
Sec.35 IEA,1872)
Section 30 (Old Corresponding
Sec.36 IEA,1872)
Section 31 (Old Corresponding
Sec.37 IEA,1872)
Section 32 (Old Corresponding
Sec.38 IEA,1872)
Entries in books of account when relevant.
Relevancy of
entry in public record or an electronic record made in performance of duty.
Relevancy of statements in
maps, charts and plans.
Relevancy of statement as to
fact of public nature contained in certain Acts or notifications.
Relevancy of statements as to
any law contained in law books including electronic or digital form.
PART II
CHAPTER II
HOW MUCH OF A STATEMENT IS TO BE PROVED
Section 33 (Old Corresponding
Sec.39 IEA,1872)
What evidence to be given
when statement forms part of a conversation, document, electronic record, book
or series of letters or papers.
PART II
CHAPTER II
JUDGMENTS OF COURTS WHEN RELEVANT
Section 34 (Old Corresponding
Sec.40 IEA,1872)
Section 35 (Old Corresponding
Sec.41 IEA,1872)
Section 36 (Old Corresponding
Sec.42 IEA,1872)
Section 37 (Old Corresponding
Sec.43 IEA,1872)
Previous judgments relevant
to bar a second suit or trial.
Relevancy of certain
judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction.
Relevancy and
effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in section
35.
Judgments, etc., other than
those mentioned in sections 34, 35 and 36 when relevant.
Section 38 (Old Corresponding
Sec.44 IEA,1872)
Fraud or collusion in obtaining
judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved.
PART II
CHAPTER II
OPINIONS OF THIRD PERSONS WHEN RELEVANT
Section 39
Section 40 (Old Corresponding
Sec.46 IEA,1872)
Section 41
Section 42 (Old Corresponding
Sec.48 IEA,1872)
Section 43 (Old Corresponding
Sec.49 IEA,1872)
Section 44 (Old Corresponding
Sec.50 IEA,1872)
Section 45 (Old Corresponding
Sec.51 IEA,1872)
Opinions of experts.
Facts bearing upon opinions of experts.
Opinion as to handwriting and
signature, when relevant.
Opinion as to existence of
general custom or right, when relevant.
Opinion as to usages, tenets,
etc., when relevant.
Opinion on relationship, when relevant.
Grounds of opinion, when relevant.
PART II
CHAPTER II
CHARACTER WHEN RELEVANT
Section 46 (Old Corresponding
Sec.52 IEA,1872)
Section 47 (Old Corresponding
Sec.53 IEA,1872)
Section 48 (Old Corresponding Sec.53A IEA,1872)
Section 49 (Old Corresponding
Sec.54 IEA,1872)
Section 50 (Old Corresponding
Sec.55 IEA,1872)
In civil cases character to
prove conduct imputed, irrelevant.
In criminal cases previous
good character relevant.
Evidence of
character or previous sexual experience not relevant in certain cases.
Previous bad character not
relevant, except in reply.
Character as affecting damages.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER III
FACTS WHICH NEED NOT BE PROVED
Section 51 (Old Corresponding
Sec.56 IEA,1872)
Fact judicially noticeable
need not be proved.
Section 52 (Old Corresponding
Sec.57 IEA,1872)
Section 53 (Old Corresponding
Sec.58 IEA,1872)
Facts of which Court shall
take judicial notice.
Facts admitted need not be proved.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER IV
OF ORAL
EVIDENCE
Section 54 (Old Corresponding
Sec.59 IEA,1872)
Section 55 (Old Corresponding
Sec.60 IEA,1872)
Proof of facts by oral evidence.
Oral evidence to be direct.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER V
OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Section 56 (Old Corresponding
Sec.61 IEA,1872)
Section 57 (Old Corresponding
Sec.62 IEA,1872)
Section 58 (Old Corresponding
Sec.63 IEA,1872)
Section 59 (Old Corresponding
Sec.64 IEA,1872)
Section 60 (Old Corresponding
Sec.65 IEA,1872)
Section 61
Section 62 (Old Corresponding Sec.65A IEA,1872)
Section 63 (Old Corresponding Sec.65B IEA,1872)
Section 64 (Old Corresponding
Sec.66 IEA,1872)
Section 65 (Old Corresponding
Sec.67 IEA,1872)
Section 66 (Old Corresponding Sec.67A IEA,1872)
Proof of contents of documents.
Primary evidence.
Secondary evidence.
Proof of documents by primary evidence.
Cases in which secondary evidence
relating to documents may be given.
Electronic or digital record.
Special provisions as to
evidence relating to electronic record.
Admissibility of electronic records.
Rules as to notice to produce.
Proof of signature and
handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document produced.
Proof as to electronic signature.
Section 67 (Old Corresponding
Sec.68 IEA,1872)
Section 68 (Old Corresponding
Sec.69 IEA,1872)
Section 69 (Old Corresponding
Sec.70 IEA,1872)
Section 70 (Old Corresponding
Sec.71 IEA,1872)
Section 71 (Old Corresponding
Sec.72 IEA,1872)
Section 72 (Old Corresponding
Sec.73 IEA,1872)
Section 73 (Old Corresponding Sec.73A IEA,1872)
Proof of execution of
document required by law to be attested.
Proof where no attesting witness found.
Admission of execution by
party to attested document.
Proof when attesting witness
denies execution.
Proof of document not
required by law to be attested.
Comparison of signature,
writing or seal with others admitted or proved.
Proof as to verification of digital signature.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER V
PUBLIC
DOCUMENTS
Section 74
Section 75 (Old Corresponding
Sec.76 IEA,1872)
Section 76 (Old Corresponding
Sec.77 IEA,1872)
Section 77 (Old Corresponding
Sec.78 IEA,1872)
Public and private documents.
Certified copies
of public documents.
Proof of documents by
production of certified copies.
Proof of other official documents.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER V
PRESUMPTIONS AS TO DOCUMENTS
Section 78 (Old Corresponding
Sec.79 IEA,1872)
Section 79 (Old Corresponding
Sec.80 IEA,1872)
Section 80 (Old Corresponding
Sec.81 IEA,1872)
Section 81 (Old Corresponding Sec.81A IEA,1872)
Presumption as to genuineness
of certified copies.
Presumption as to documents
produced as record of evidence, etc.
Presumption as to Gazettes,
newspapers, and other documents.
Presumption as to Gazettes in
electronic or digital record.
Section 82 (Old Corresponding
Sec.83 IEA,1872)
Section 83 (Old Corresponding
Sec.84 IEA,1872)
Section 84 (Old Corresponding
Sec.85 IEA,1872)
Section 85 (Old Corresponding
Sec.85A IEA,1872)
Section 86 (Old Corresponding
Sec.85B IEA,1872)
Section 87 (Old Corresponding Sec.85C IEA,1872)
Section 88 (Old Corresponding
Sec.86 IEA,1872)
Section 89 (Old Corresponding
Sec.87 IEA,1872)
Section 90 (Old Corresponding
Sec.88A IEA,1872)
Section 91 (Old Corresponding
Sec.89 IEA,1872)
Section 92 (Old Corresponding
Sec.90 IEA,1872)
Section 93 (Old Corresponding
Sec.90A IEA,1872)
Presumption as to maps or
plans made by authority of Government.
Presumption as to collections
of laws and reports of decisions.
Presumption as to powersof-attorney.
Presumption as to electronic agreements.
Presumption as to electronic
records and electronic signatures.
Presumption as to Electronic
Signature Certificates.
Presumption as to certified
copies of foreign judicial records.
Presumption as to books, maps and charts.
Presumption as to electronic messages.
Presumption as to due
execution, etc., of documents not produced.
Presumption as to documents
thirty years old.
Presumption as to electronic
records five years old.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER VI
OF THE EXCLUSION OF ORAL EVIDENCE BY DOCUMENTARY
EVIDENCE
Section 94 (Old Corresponding
Sec.91 IEA,1872)
Section 95 (Old Corresponding
Sec.92 IEA,1872)
Section 96 (Old Corresponding
Sec.93 IEA,1872)
Section 97 (Old Corresponding
Sec.94 IEA,1872)
Section 98 (Old Corresponding
Sec.95 IEA,1872)
Evidence of terms of
contracts, grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of
document.
Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement.
Exclusion of evidence to
explain or amend ambiguous document.
Exclusion of evidence against
application of document to existing facts.
Evidence as to document
unmeaning in reference to existing facts.
Section 99 (Old Corresponding
Sec.96 IEA,1872)
Section 100 (Old
Corresponding Sec.97 IEA,1872)
Section 101 (Old
Corresponding Sec.98 IEA,1872)
Section 102 (Old
Corresponding Sec.99 IEA,1872)
Section 103 (Old Corresponding Sec.100 IEA,1872)
Evidence as to
application of language which can apply to one only of several persons.
Evidence as to application of
language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the whole correctly
applies.
Evidence as to meaning of
illegible characters, etc.
Who may give evidence of
agreement varying terms of document.
Saving of provisions of
Indian Succession Act relating to wills.
PART IV
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER VII
OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF
Section 104 (Old Corresponding Sec.101 IEA,1872)
Section 105 (Old Corresponding Sec.102 IEA,1872)
Section 106 (Old Corresponding Sec.103 IEA,1872)
Section 107 (Old Corresponding Sec.104 IEA,1872)
Section 108 (Old Corresponding Sec.105 IEA,1872)
Section 109 (Old Corresponding Sec.106 IEA,1872)
Section 110 (Old Corresponding Sec.107 IEA,1872)
Section 111 (Old Corresponding Sec.108 IEA,1872)
Section 112 (Old Corresponding Sec.109 IEA,1872)
Section 113 (Old Corresponding Sec.110 IEA,1872)
Section 114 (Old Corresponding Sec.111 IEA,1872)
Burden of proof.
On whom burden of proof lies.
Burden of proof as to particular fact.
Burden of proving fact to be
proved to make evidence admissible.
Burden of proving that case
of accused comes within exceptions.
Burden of proving fact
especially within knowledge.
Burden of proving death of
person known to have been alive within thirty years.
Burden of proving that person
is alive who has not been heard of for seven years.
Burden of proof
as to relationship in the cases of partners, landlord and tenant, principal and
agent.
Burden of proof as to ownership.
Proof of good faith in
transactions where one party is in relation of active confidence.
Section 115 (Old
Corresponding Sec.111A IEA,1872)
Section 116 (Old
Corresponding Sec.112 IEA,1872)
Section 117 (Old Corresponding Sec.113A
IEA,1872)
Section 118 (Old Corresponding Sec.113B
IEA,1872)
Section 119 (Old
Corresponding Sec.114 IEA,1872)
Section 120 (Old Corresponding Sec.114A
IEA,1872)
Presumption as to certain offences.
Birth during marriage,
conclusive proof of legitimacy.
Presumption as to abetment of
suicide by a married woman.
Presumption as to dowry death.
Court may presume existence
of certain facts.
Presumption as to absence of
consent in certain prosecution for rape.
PART IV
PRODUCTION
AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER
VIII
ESTOPPEL
Section 121 (Old Corresponding Sec.115 IEA,1872)
Section 122 (Old Corresponding Sec.116 IEA,1872)
Section 123 (Old Corresponding Sec.117 IEA,1872)
Estoppel.
Estoppel of tenant and of
licensee of person in possession.
Estoppel of acceptor of bill
of exchange, bailee or licensee.
PART IV
PRODUCTION
AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER IX
OF
WITNESSES
Section 124 (Old Corresponding Sec.118 IEA,1872)
Section 125 (Old Corresponding Sec.119 IEA,1872)
Section 126 (Old Corresponding Sec.120 IEA,1872)
Section 127 (Old Corresponding Sec.121 IEA,1872)
Section 128 (Old Corresponding Sec.122 IEA,1872)
Section 129 (Old Corresponding Sec.123 IEA,1872)
Who may testify.
Witness unable to communicate verbally.
Competency of husband and
wife as witnesses in certain cases.
Judges and Magistrates.
Communications during marriage.
Evidence as to affairs of State.
Section 130 (Old
Corresponding Sec.124 IEA,1872)
Section 131 (Old Corresponding Sec.125 IEA,1872)
Section 132
Section 133 (Old Corresponding Sec.128 IEA,1872)
Section 134 (Old Corresponding Sec.129 IEA,1872)
Section 135 (Old Corresponding Sec.130 IEA,1872)
Section 136 (Old Corresponding Sec.131 IEA,1872)
Section 137 (Old Corresponding Sec.132 IEA,1872)
Section 138 (Old Corresponding Sec.133 IEA,1872)
Section 139 (Old Corresponding Sec.134 IEA,1872)
Official communications.
Information as to commission of offences.
Professional communications.
Privilege not waived by
volunteering evidence.
Confidential
communication with legal advisers.
Production of title-deeds of
witness not a party.
Production of
documents or electronic records which another person, having possession, could
refuse to produce.
Witness not excused from
answering on ground that answer will criminate.
Accomplice.
Number of witnesses.
PART IV
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER X
OF EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Section 140 (Old Corresponding Sec.135 IEA,1872)
Section 141 (Old Corresponding Sec.136 IEA,1872)
Section 142 (Old Corresponding Sec.137 IEA,1872)
Section 143 (Old Corresponding Sec.138 IEA,1872)
Section 144 (Old Corresponding Sec.139 IEA,1872)
Section 145 (Old Corresponding Sec.140 IEA,1872)
Section 146
Section 147 (Old Corresponding Sec.144 IEA,1872)
Order of production and
examination of witnesses.
Judge to decide as to
admissibility of evidence.
Examination of witnesses.
Order of examinations.
Crossexamination of person
called to produce a document.
Witnesses to character.
Leading questions.
Evidence as to matters in writing.
Section 148 (Old
Corresponding Sec.145 IEA,1872)
Section 149 (Old Corresponding Sec.146 IEA,1872)
Section 150 (Old Corresponding Sec.147 IEA,1872)
Section 151 (Old Corresponding Sec.148 IEA,1872)
Section 152 (Old Corresponding Sec.149 IEA,1872)
Section 153 (Old Corresponding Sec.150 IEA,1872)
Section 154 (Old Corresponding Sec.151 IEA,1872)
Section 155 (Old Corresponding Sec.152 IEA,1872)
Section 156 (Old Corresponding Sec.153 IEA,1872)
Section 157 (Old Corresponding Sec.154 IEA,1872)
Section 158 (Old Corresponding Sec.155 IEA,1872)
Section 159 (Old Corresponding Sec.156 IEA,1872)
Section 160 (Old Corresponding Sec.157 IEA,1872)
Section 161 (Old Corresponding Sec.158 IEA,1872)
Section 162 (Old Corresponding Sec.159 IEA,1872)
Section 163 (Old Corresponding Sec.160 IEA,1872)
Section 164 (Old Corresponding Sec.161 IEA,1872)
Section 165 (Old Corresponding Sec.162 IEA,1872)
Section 166 (Old Corresponding Sec.163 IEA,1872)
Cross-examination as to
previous statements in writing.
Questions lawful in cross-examination.
When witness to be compelled to answer.
Court to decide
when question shall be asked and when witness compelled to answer.
Question not to be asked without
reasonable grounds.
Procedure of Court in case of
question being asked without reasonable grounds.
Indecent and scandalous questions.
Questions intended to insult or annoy.
Exclusion of evidence to
contradict answers to questions testing veracity.
Question by party to his own witness.
Impeaching credit of witness.
Questions tending to
corroborate evidence of relevant fact, admissible.
Former statements of witness
may be proved to corroborate later testimony as to same fact.
What matters may be proved in
connection with proved statement relevant under section 26 or 27.
Refreshing memory.
Testimony to facts stated in
document mentioned in section 162.
Right of adverse party as to
writing used to refresh memory.
Production of documents.
Giving, as evidence, of
document called for and produced on notice.
Section 167 (Old
Corresponding Sec.164 IEA,1872)
Section 168 (Old Corresponding Sec.165 IEA,1872)
Using, as evidence, of
document production of which was refused on notice.
Judge's power to put
questions or order production.
PART IV
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER XI
OF IMPROPER ADMISSION AND REJECTION OF EVIDENCE
Section 169 (Old Corresponding Sec.167 IEA,1872)
No new trial for improper
admission or rejection of evidence.
PART IV
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER XII
REPEAL AND SAVINGS
Section 170 (Old Corresponding Sec.2
Repeal and savings.
IEA,1872)
THE SCHEDULE
Schedule
THE BHARATIYA
SAKSHYA ADHINIYAM, 2023
No. 47 OF 2023
[25th
December, 2023]
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:—
PART I
CHAPTER I
PRELIMINARY
Section 1 (Old Corresponding
Sec.1 IEA,1872)
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 officer, nor to
proceedings before an arbitrator.
(3)
It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by
notification in the Official Gazette, appoint.
Section 2
Definitions.
(1)
In this Adhiniyam, unless the context otherwise requires, (Old
Corresponding Sec.3 IEA,1872) —
(a) "Court" includes
all Judges and Magistrates, and all persons, except arbitrators, legally
authorised to take evidence; (Old Corresponding Sec.3, para 1 IEA,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; (Old
Corresponding Sec.4, para 3 IEA,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; (Old Corresponding
Sec.3, para 8 IEA,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 and digital records. (Old
Corresponding
Sec.3, para 5 IEA,1872)
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;
(e) "evidence" means and includes (Old
Corresponding Sec.3, para 6 IEA,1872)—
(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 such
statements are called oral evidence;
(ii) all documents including
electronic or digital records produced for the inspection of the Court and such
documents are called documentary evidence;
(f) "fact" means and includes (Old
Corresponding Sec.3, para 2 IEA,1872)—
(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;
(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. (Old Corresponding Sec.3, para 4 IEA,1872)
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;
(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; (Old Corresponding Sec.4, para 1 IEA,1872)
(i) "not proved".—A
fact is said to be not proved when it is neither proved nor disproved; (Old
Corresponding Sec.3, para 9 IEA,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; (Old Corresponding Sec.3, para 7 IEA,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; (Old Corresponding Sec.3, para 3 IEA,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. (Old
Corresponding Sec.4, para 2 IEA,1872)
(2)
Words and expressions used herein and not defined but defined in the
Information Technology Act, 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.
PART II
CHAPTER II
RELEVANCY OF FACTS
Section 3 (Old Corresponding
Sec.5 IEA,1872)
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 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.
PART II
CHAPTER II
CLOSELY CONNECTED FACTS
Section 4 (Old Corresponding
Sec.6 IEA,1872)
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 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
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.
Section 5 (Old Corresponding
Sec.7 IEA,1872)
Facts which are occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue or 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.
Section 6 (Old Corresponding
Sec.8 IEA,1872)
Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct.
(1)
Any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation
for 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 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.
Section 7 (Old Corresponding
Sec.9 IEA,1872)
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.
(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.
Section 8 (Old Corresponding
Sec.10 IEA,1872)
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.
Illustration.
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, 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.
Section 9 (Old Corresponding
Sec.11 IEA,1872)
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,
(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.
Section 10 (Old Corresponding
Sec.12 IEA,1872)
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.
Section 11 (Old Corresponding
Sec.13 IEA,1872)
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.
Illustration.
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.
Section 12 (Old Corresponding
Sec.14 IEA,1872)
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.
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.
(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.
Section 13 (Old Corresponding
Sec.15 IEA,1872)
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.
Section 14 (Old Corresponding
Sec.16 IEA,1872)
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.
(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.
PART II
CHAPTER II
ADMISSIONS
Section 15 (Old Corresponding
Sec.17 IEA,1872)
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
any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned.
Section 16 (Old Corresponding
Sec.18 IEA,1872)
Admission by party to proceeding or his agent.
(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.
Section 17 (Old Corresponding
Sec.19 IEA,1872)
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.
Illustration.
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.
Section 18 (Old Corresponding
Sec.20 IEA,1872)
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.
Illustration.
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.
Section 19 (Old Corresponding
Sec.21 IEA,1872)
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 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.
Section 20 (Old Corresponding
Sec.22 IEA,1872)
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 under the rules hereinafter contained, or unless
the genuineness of a document produced is in question.
Section 21 (Old Corresponding
Sec.23 IEA,1872)
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 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.
Section 22 (Old Corresponding
Sec.24/ 28/ 29 IEA,1872)
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:
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:
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.
Section 23
Confession to police officer.
(1)
No confession made to a police officer shall be proved as against a
person accused of any offence. (Old Corresponding Sec.25 IEA,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 (Old Corresponding Sec.26/27 IEA,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.
Section 24 (Old Corresponding
Sec.30 IEA,1872)
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 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.
Section 25
(Old Corresponding Sec.31 IEA,1872)
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.
PART II
CHAPTER II
STATEMENTS BY PERSONS WHO CANNOT BE CALLED AS
WITNESSES
Section 26 (Old Corresponding
Sec.32 IEA,1872)
Cases in which statement of
relevant fact by person who is dead 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;
(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;
(c)
when the statement is against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of
the person making it, or when, if true, it would expose him or would have
exposed him to a criminal prosecution or to a suit for damages;
(d)
when the statement gives the opinion of any such person, as to the
existence of any public right or custom or matter of public or general
interest, of the existence of which, if it existed, he would have been likely
to be aware, and when such statement was made before any controversy as to such
right, custom or matter had arisen;
(e)
when the statement relates to the existence of any relationship by
blood, marriage or adoption between persons as to whose relationship by blood,
marriage or adoption the person making the statement had special means of
knowledge, and when the statement was made before the question in dispute was
raised;
(f)
when
the statement relates to the existence of any relationship by blood, marriage
or adoption between persons deceased, and is made in any will or deed relating
to the affairs of the family to which any such deceased person belonged, or in
any family pedigree, or upon any tombstone, family portrait or other thing on
which such statements are usually made, and when such statement was made before
the question in dispute was raised;
(g)
when the statement is contained in any deed, will or other document
which relates to any such transaction as is specified in clause (a) of section
11;
(h)
when the statement was made by a number of persons, and expressed
feelings or impressions on their part relevant to the matter in question.
Illustrations.
(a) The question is, whether A
was murdered by B; or A dies of injuries received in a transaction in the
course of which she was raped. The question is whether she was raped by B; or
the question is, whether A was killed by B under such circumstances that a suit
would lie against B by A's widow. Statements made by A as to the cause of his
or her death, referring respectively to the murder, the rape and the actionable
wrong under consideration, are relevant facts.
(b) The question is as to the
date of A's birth. An entry in the diary of a deceased surgeon regularly kept
in the course of business, stating that, on a given day he attended A's mother
and delivered her of a son, is a relevant fact.
(c) The question is, whether A
was in Nagpur on a given day. A statement in the diary of a deceased solicitor,
regularly kept in the course of business, that on a given day the solicitor
attended A at a place mentioned, in Nagpur, for the purpose of conferring with
him upon specified business, is a relevant fact.
(d) The question is, whether a
ship sailed from Mumbai harbour on a given day. A letter written by a deceased
member of a merchant's firm by which she was chartered to their correspondents
in Chennai, to whom the cargo was consigned, stating that the ship sailed on a
given day from Mumbai port, is a relevant fact.
(e) The question is, whether rent
was paid to A for certain land. A letter from A's deceased agent to A, saying
that he had received the rent on A's account and held it at A's orders is a
relevant fact.
(f) The question is, whether A
and B were legally married. The statement of a deceased clergyman that he
married them under such circumstances that the celebration would be a crime is
relevant.
(g) The question is, whether A, a
person who cannot be found, wrote a letter on a certain day. The fact that a
letter written by him is dated on that day is relevant.
(h) The question is, what was the
cause of the wreck of a ship. A protest made by the captain, whose attendance
cannot be procured, is a relevant fact.
(i) The question is, whether a
given road is a public way. A statement by A, a deceased headman of the
village, that the road was public, is a relevant fact.
(j) The question is, what was the
price of grain on a certain day in a particular market. A statement of the
price, made by a deceased business person in the ordinary course of his
business, is a relevant fact.
(k) The question is, whether A,
who is dead, was the father of B. A statement by A that B was his son, is a
relevant fact.
(l) The question is, what was the
date of the birth of A. A letter from A's deceased father to a friend,
announcing the birth of A on a given day, is a relevant fact.
(m) The question is, whether, and
when, A and B were married. An entry in a memorandum book by C, the deceased
father of B, of his daughter's marriage with A on a given date, is a relevant
fact.
(n) A sues B for a libel
expressed in a painted caricature exposed in a shop window. The question is as
to the similarity of the caricature and its libellous character. The remarks of
a crowd of spectators on these points may be proved.
Section 27 (Old Corresponding
Sec.33 IEA,1872)
Relevancy of certain evidence
for proving, in subsequent proceeding, truth of facts therein stated.
Evidence given by
a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to
take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial
proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, the truth of
the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is
incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party,
or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense
which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable:
Provided that the
proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest;
that the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to
cross-examine and the questions in issue were substantially the same in the
first as in the second proceeding.
Explanation.—A criminal trial
or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between the prosecutor and the
accused within the meaning of this section.
PART II
CHAPTER II
STATEMENTS MADE UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES
Section 28 (Old Corresponding
Sec.34 IEA,1872)
Entries in books of account when relevant.
Entries in the
books of account, including those maintained in an electronic form, regularly
kept in the course of business are relevant whenever they refer to a matter
into which the Court has to inquire, but such statements shall not alone be
sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability.
Illustration.
A sues B for one
thousand rupees, and shows entries in his account books showing B to be
indebted to him to this amount. The entries are relevant, but are not
sufficient, without other evidence, to prove the debt.
Section 29 (Old Corresponding
Sec.35 IEA,1872)
Relevancy of entry in public record or an
electronic record made in performance of duty.
An entry in any
public or other official book, register or record or an electronic record,
stating a fact in issue or relevant fact, and made by a public servant in the
discharge of his official duty, or by any other person in performance of a duty
specially enjoined by the law of the country in which such book, register or
record or an electronic record, is kept, is itself a relevant fact.
Section 30 (Old Corresponding
Sec.36 IEA,1872)
Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans.
Statements of
facts in issue or relevant facts, made in published maps or charts generally
offered for public sale, or in maps or plans made under the authority of the
Central Government or any State Government, as to matters usually represented
or stated in such maps, charts or plans, are themselves relevant facts.
Section 31 (Old Corresponding
Sec.37 IEA,1872)
Relevancy of statement as to fact of public nature contained in certain
Acts or notifications.
When the Court
has to form an opinion as to the existence of any fact of a public nature, any
statement of it, made in a recital contained in any Central Act or State Act or
in a Central Government or State Government notification appearing in the
respective Official Gazette or in any printed paper or in electronic or digital
form purporting to be such Gazette, is a relevant fact.
Section 32 (Old Corresponding
Sec.38 IEA,1872)
Relevancy of statements as to
any law contained in law books including electronic or digital form.
When the Court
has to form an opinion as to a law of any country, any statement of such law
contained in a book purporting to be printed or published including in
electronic or digital form under the authority of the Government of such
country and to contain any such law, and any report of a ruling of the Courts
of such country contained in a book including in electronic or digital form
purporting to be a report of such rulings, is relevant.
PART II
CHAPTER II
HOW MUCH OF A STATEMENT IS TO BE PROVED
Section 33 (Old Corresponding
Sec.39 IEA,1872)
What evidence to be given
when statement forms part of a conversation, document, electronic record, book
or series of letters or papers.
When any statement of which
evidence is given forms part of a longer statement, or of a conversation or
part of an isolated document, or is contained in a document which forms part of
a
book, or is contained in part of electronic record or of a connected series of
letters or papers, evidence shall be given of so much and no more of the
statement, conversation, document, electronic record, book or series of letters
or papers as the Court considers necessary in that particular case to the full
understanding of the nature and effect of the statement, and of the
circumstances under which it was made.
PART II
CHAPTER II
JUDGMENTS OF COURTS WHEN RELEVANT
Section 34 (Old Corresponding
Sec.40 IEA,1872)
Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial.
The existence of
any judgment, order or decree which by law prevents any Court from taking
cognizance of a suit or holding a trial, is a relevant fact when the question
is whether such Court ought to take cognizance of such suit or to hold such
trial.
Section 35 (Old Corresponding
Sec.41 IEA,1872)
Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction.
(1)
A final judgment, order or decree of a competent Court or Tribunal, in
the exercise of probate, matrimonial, admiralty or insolvency jurisdiction,
which confers upon or takes away from any person any legal character, or which
declares any person to be entitled to any such character, or to be entitled to
any specific thing, not as against any specified person but absolutely, is
relevant when the existence of any such legal character, or the title of any such
person to any such thing, is relevant.
(2)
Such
judgment, order or decree is conclusive proof that—
(i) any legal character, which it
confers accrued at the time when such judgment, order or decree came into
operation;
(ii) any legal character, to which
it declares any such person to be entitled, accrued to that person at the time
when such judgment, order or decree declares it to have accrued to that person;
(iii) any legal character which it
takes away from any such person ceased at the time from which such judgment,
order or decree declared that it had ceased or should cease; and
(iv) anything to which it declares
any person to be so entitled was the property of that person at the time from
which such judgment, order or decree declares that it had been or should be his
property.
Section 36 (Old Corresponding
Sec.42 IEA,1872)
Relevancy and effect of
judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in section 35.
Judgments,
orders or decrees other than those mentioned in section 35 are relevant if they
relate to matters of a public nature relevant to the enquiry; but such
judgments, orders or decrees are not conclusive proof of that which they state.
Illustration.
A sues B for trespass on his
land. B alleges the existence of a public right of way over the land, which A
denies. The existence of a decree in favour of the defendant, in a suit by A
against C for a trespass on the same land, in which C alleged the existence of
the same right of way, is relevant, but it is not conclusive proof that the
right of way exists.
Section 37 (Old Corresponding
Sec.43 IEA,1872)
Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in sections 34, 35 and 36
when relevant.
Judgments or orders or
decrees, other than those mentioned in sections 34, 35 and 36, are irrelevant,
unless the existence of such judgment, order or decree is a fact in issue, or
is relevant under some other provision of this Adhiniyam.
Illustrations.
(a) A and B separately sue C for
a libel which reflects upon each of them. C in each case says that the matter alleged
to be libellous is true, and the circumstances are such that it is probably
true in each case, or in neither. A obtains a decree against C for damages on
the ground that C failed to make out his justification. The fact is irrelevant
as between B and C.
(b) A prosecutes B for stealing a
cow from him. B is convicted. A afterwards sues C for the cow, which B had sold
to him before his conviction. As between A and C, the judgment against B is
irrelevant.
(c) A has obtained a decree for
the possession of land against B. C, B's son, murders A in consequence. The
existence of the judgment is relevant, as showing motive for a crime.
(d) A is charged with theft and
with having been previously convicted of theft. The previous conviction is
relevant as a fact in issue.
(e) A is tried for the murder of
B. The fact that B prosecuted A for libel and that A was convicted and
sentenced is relevant under section 6 as showing the motive for the fact in
issue.
Section 38 (Old Corresponding
Sec.44 IEA,1872)
Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may
be proved.
Any party to a suit or other
proceeding may show that any judgment, order or decree which is relevant under
section 34, 35 or 36, and which has been proved by the adverse party, was
delivered by a Court not competent to deliver it, or was obtained by fraud or
collusion.
PART II
CHAPTER II
OPINIONS OF THIRD PERSONS WHEN RELEVANT
Opinions of experts.
(1)
When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of
science or art, or any other field, or as to identity of handwriting or finger
impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such
foreign law, science or art, or any other field, or in questions as to identity
of handwriting or finger impressions are relevant facts and such persons are
called experts. (Old Corresponding Sec.45 IEA,1872)
Illustrations.
(a) The question is, whether the
death of A was caused by poison. The opinions of experts as to the symptoms
produced by the poison by which A is supposed to have died, are relevant.
(b) The question is, whether A,
at the time of doing a certain act, was, by reason of unsoundness of mind,
incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he was doing what was
either wrong or contrary to law. The opinions of experts upon the question
whether the symptoms exhibited by A commonly show unsoundness of mind, and
whether such unsoundness of mind usually renders persons incapable of knowing
the nature of the acts which they do, or of knowing that what they do is either
wrong or contrary to law, are relevant.
(c) The question is, whether a
certain document was written by A. Another document is produced which is proved
or admitted to have been written by A. The opinions of experts on the question
whether the two documents were written by the same person or by different
persons, are relevant.
(2)
When in a proceeding, the court has to form an opinion on any matter
relating to any information transmitted or stored in any computer resource or
any other electronic or digital form, the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic
Evidence referred to in section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, is
a relevant fact. (Old Corresponding Sec.45A IEA,1872)
Explanation.—For the purposes
of this sub-section, an Examiner of Electronic Evidence shall be an expert.
Section 40 (Old Corresponding
Sec.46 IEA,1872)
Facts bearing upon opinions of experts.
Facts, not otherwise
relevant, are relevant if they support or are inconsistent with the opinions of
experts, when such opinions are relevant.
Illustrations.
(a) The question is, whether A
was poisoned by a certain poison. The fact that other persons, who were
poisoned by that poison, exhibited certain symptoms which experts affirm or
deny to be the symptoms of that poison, is relevant.
(b) The question is, whether an
obstruction to a harbour is caused by a certain sea-wall. The fact that other
harbours similarly situated in other respects, but where there were no such
sea-walls, began to be obstructed at about the same time, is relevant.
Section 41
Opinion as to handwriting and signature, when
relevant.
(1)
When the Court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom any
document was written or signed, the opinion of any person acquainted with the
handwriting of the person by whom it is supposed to be written or signed that
it was or was not written or signed by that person, is a relevant fact. (Old
Corresponding Sec.47 IEA,1872)
Explanation.—A person is said
to be acquainted with the handwriting of another person when he has seen that
person write, or when he has received documents purporting to be written by
that person in answer to documents written by himself or under his authority
and addressed to that person, or when, in the ordinary course of business,
documents purporting to be written by that person have been habitually
submitted to him.
Illustration.
The question is, whether a
given letter is in the handwriting of A, a merchant in Itanagar. B is a
merchant in Bengaluru, who has written letters addressed to A and received
letters purporting to be written by him. C, is B's clerk whose duty it was to
examine and file B's correspondence. D is B's broker, to whom B habitually
submitted the letters purporting to be written by A for the purpose of advising
him thereon. The opinions of B, C and D on the question whether the letter is
in the handwriting of A are relevant, though neither B, C nor D ever saw A
write.
(2)
When the Court has to form an opinion as to the electronic signature of
any person, the opinion of the Certifying Authority which has issued the
Electronic Signature Certificate is a relevant fact. (Old Corresponding Sec.47A
IEA,1872)
Section 42 (Old Corresponding
Sec.48 IEA,1872)
Opinion as to existence of general custom or right, when relevant.
When the Court
has to form an opinion as to the existence of any general custom or right, the
opinions, as to the existence of such custom or right, of persons who would be
likely to know of its existence if it existed, are relevant.
Explanation.—The expression
"general custom or right" includes customs or rights common to any
considerable class of persons.
Illustration.
The right of the villagers of
a particular village to use the water of a particular well is a general right
within the meaning of this section.
Section 43 (Old Corresponding
Sec.49 IEA,1872)
Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant.
When the Court has to form an opinion as to—
(i)
the usages
and tenets of any body of men or family;
(ii)
the
constitution and governance of any religious or charitable foundation; or
(iii) the
meaning of words or terms used in particular districts or by particular classes
of people, the opinions of persons having special means of knowledge thereon,
are relevant facts.
Section 44 (Old Corresponding
Sec.50 IEA,1872)
Opinion on relationship, when relevant.
When the Court has to form an
opinion as to the relationship of one person to another, the opinion, expressed
by conduct, as to the existence of such relationship, of any person who, as a
member of the family or otherwise, has special means of knowledge on the
subject, is a relevant fact:
Provided that such opinion
shall not be sufficient to prove a marriage in proceedings under the Divorce
Act, 1869, or in prosecution under sections 82 and 84 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
Illustrations.
(a) The question is, whether A
and B were married. The fact that they were usually received and treated by
their friends as husband and wife, is relevant.
(b) The question is, whether A
was the legitimate son of B. The fact that A was always treated as such by
members of the family, is relevant.
Section 45 (Old Corresponding
Sec.51 IEA,1872)
Grounds of opinion, when relevant.
Whenever the opinion of any
living person is relevant, the grounds on which such opinion is based are also
relevant.
Illustration.
An expert may give an account
of experiments performed by him for the purpose of forming his opinion.
PART II
CHAPTER II
CHARACTER WHEN RELEVANT
Section 46 (Old Corresponding
Sec.52 IEA,1872)
In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed, irrelevant.
In civil cases the fact that
the character of any person concerned is such as to render probable or
improbable any conduct imputed to him, is irrelevant, except in so far as such
character appears from facts otherwise relevant.
Section 47 (Old Corresponding
Sec.53 IEA,1872)
In criminal cases previous good character
relevant.
In criminal proceedings the fact that the person
accused is of a good character, is relevant.
Section 48 (Old Corresponding
Sec.53A IEA,1872)
Evidence of character or previous sexual experience not relevant in
certain cases.
In a prosecution for an
offence under section 64, section 65, section 66, section 67, section 68,
section 69, section 70, section 71, section 74, section 75, section 76, section
77 or section 78 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or for attempt to commit
any such offence, where the question of consent is in issue, evidence of the
character of the victim or of such person's previous sexual experience with any
person shall not be relevant on the issue of such consent or the quality of
consent.
Section 49 (Old Corresponding
Sec.54 IEA,1872)
Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply.
In criminal proceedings, the
fact that the accused has a bad character, is irrelevant, unless evidence has
been given that he has a good character, in which case it becomes relevant.
Explanation 1.—This section
does not apply to cases in which the bad character of any person is itself a
fact in issue.
Explanation 2.—A previous conviction is relevant
as evidence of bad character.
Section 50 (Old Corresponding
Sec.55 IEA,1872)
Character as affecting damages.
In civil cases, the fact that
the character of any person is such as to affect the amount of damages which he
ought to receive, is relevant.
Explanation.—In this section
and sections 46, 47 and 49, the word "character" includes both
reputation and disposition; but, except as provided in section 49, evidence may
be given only of general reputation and general disposition, and not of
particular acts by which reputation or disposition has been shown.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER III
FACTS WHICH NEED NOT BE PROVED
Section 51 (Old Corresponding
Sec.56 IEA,1872)
Fact judicially noticeable need not be proved.
No fact of which
the Court will take judicial notice need be proved.
Section 52 (Old Corresponding
Sec.57 IEA,1872)
Facts of which Court shall take judicial notice.
(1)
The Court
shall take judicial notice of the following facts, namely:—
(a) all laws in force in the
territory of India including laws having extra-territorial operation;
(b) international treaty,
agreement or convention with country or countries by India, or decisions made
by India at international associations or other bodies;
(c) the course of proceeding of
the Constituent Assembly of India, of Parliament of India and of the State
Legislatures;
(d) the seals of all Courts and Tribunals;
(e) the seals of Courts of
Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction, Notaries Public, and all seals which any
person is authorised to use by the Constitution, or by an Act of Parliament or
State Legislatures, or Regulations having the force of law in India;
(f) the accession to office,
names, titles, functions, and signatures of the persons filling for the time
being any public office in any State, if the fact of their appointment to such
office is notified in any Official Gazette;
(g) the existence, title and
national flag of every country or sovereign recognised by the Government of
India;
(h) the divisions of time, the
geographical divisions of the world, and public festivals, fasts and holidays
notified in the Official Gazette;
(i) the territory of India;
(j) the commencement, continuance
and termination of hostilities between the Government of India and any other
country or body of persons;
(k) the names of the members and
officers of the Court and of their deputies and subordinate officers and
assistants, and also of all officers acting in execution of its process, and of
advocates and other persons authorised by law to appear or act before it;
(l) the rule of the road on land or at sea.
(2)
In the cases referred to in sub-section (1) and also on all matters of
public history, literature, science or art, the Court may resort for its aid to
appropriate books or documents of reference and if the Court is called upon by
any person to take judicial notice of any fact, it may refuse to do so unless
and until such person produces any such book or document as it may consider
necessary to enable it to do so.
Section 53 (Old Corresponding
Sec.58 IEA,1872)
Facts admitted need not be proved.
No
fact needs to be proved in any proceeding which the parties thereto or their
agents agree to admit at the hearing, or which, before the hearing, they agree
to admit by any writing under their hands, or which by any rule of pleading in
force at the time they are deemed to have admitted by their pleadings:
Provided that the Court may,
in its discretion, require the facts admitted to be proved otherwise than by
such admissions.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER IV
OF ORAL
EVIDENCE
Section 54 (Old Corresponding
Sec.59 IEA,1872)
Proof of facts by oral evidence.
All facts, except the contents of documents may
be proved by oral evidence.
Section 55 (Old Corresponding
Sec.60 IEA,1872)
Oral evidence to be direct.
Oral evidence shall, in all cases whatever, be
direct; if it refers to,—
(i)
a fact
which could be seen, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he saw it;
(ii)
a fact
which could be heard, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he heard
it;
(iii)
a fact which could be perceived by any other sense or in any other
manner, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he perceived it by that
sense or in that manner;
(iv)
an opinion or to the grounds on which that opinion is held, it must be
the evidence of the person who holds that opinion on those grounds:
Provided that the
opinions of experts expressed in any treatise commonly offered for sale, and
the grounds on which such opinions are held, may be proved by the production of
such treatises if the author is dead or cannot be found, or has become
incapable of giving evidence, or cannot be called as a witness without an
amount of delay or expense which the Court regards as unreasonable:
Provided further
that, if oral evidence refers to the existence or condition of any material
thing other than a document, the Court may, if it thinks fit, require the
production of such material thing for its inspection.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER V
OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Section 56
(Old Corresponding Sec.61 IEA,1872)
Proof of contents of documents.
The contents of documents may be proved either
by primary or by secondary evidence.
Section 57 (Old Corresponding
Sec.62 IEA,1872)
Primary evidence.
Primary evidence means the document itself
produced for the inspection of the Court.
Explanation 1.—Where a
document is executed in several parts, each part is primary evidence of the
document.
Explanation 2.—Where
a document is executed in counterpart, each counterpart being executed by one
or some of the parties only, each counterpart is primary evidence as against
the parties executing it.
Explanation 3.—Where
a number of documents are all made by one uniform process, as in the case of
printing, lithography or photography, each is primary evidence of the contents
of the rest; but, where they are all copies of a common original, they are not
primary evidence of the contents of the original.
Explanation 4.—Where an
electronic or digital record is created or stored, and such storage occurs
simultaneously or sequentially in multiple files, each such file is primary
evidence.
Explanation 5.—Where an
electronic or digital record is produced from proper custody, such electronic
and digital record is primary evidence unless it is disputed.
Explanation 6.—Where
a video recording is simultaneously stored in electronic form and transmitted
or broadcast or transferred to another, each of the stored recordings is
primary evidence.
Explanation 7.—Where
an electronic or digital record is stored in multiple storage spaces in a
computer resource, each such automated storage, including temporary files, is
primary evidence.
Illustration.
A person is shown
to have been in possession of a number of placards, all printed at one time
from one original. Any one of the placards is primary evidence of the contents
of any other, but no one of them is primary evidence of the contents of the
original.
Section 58 (Old Corresponding
Sec.63 IEA,1872)
Secondary evidence.
Secondary evidence includes—
(i)
certified
copies given under the provisions hereinafter contained;
(ii)
copies made from the original by mechanical processes which in
themselves ensure the accuracy of the copy, and copies compared with such
copies;
(iii)
copies
made from or compared with the original;
(iv)
counterparts
of documents as against the parties who did not execute them;
(v)
oral
accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself
seen it;
(vi)
oral
admissions;
(vii)
written
admissions;
(viii)
evidence of a person who has examined a document, the original of which
consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot conveniently be
examined in Court, and who is skilled in the examination of such documents.
Illustrations.
(a) A photograph of an original
is secondary evidence of its contents, though the two have not been compared,
if it is proved that the thing photographed was the original.
(b) A copy compared with a copy
of a letter made by a copying machine is secondary evidence of the contents of
the letter, if it is shown that the copy made by the copying machine was made
from the original.
(c) A copy transcribed from a
copy, but afterwards compared with the original, is secondary evidence; but the
copy not so compared is not secondary evidence of the original, although the
copy from which it was transcribed was compared with the original.
(d) Neither an oral account of a
copy compared with the original, nor an oral account of a photograph or
machine-copy of the original, is secondary evidence of the original.
Section 59 (Old Corresponding
Sec.64 IEA,1872)
Proof of documents by primary evidence.
Documents shall be proved by primary evidence
except in the cases hereinafter mentioned.
Section 60 (Old Corresponding
Sec.65 IEA,1872)
Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given.
Secondary evidence may be
given of the existence, condition, or contents of a document in the following
cases, namely: —
(a)
when the
original is shown or appears to be in the possession or power—
(i) of the person against whom the document is sought
to be proved; or
(ii) of any person out of reach of, or not subject
to, the process of the Court; or
(iii) of any person legally bound to produce it,
and when, after the notice mentioned in section
64 such person does not produce it;
(b)
when the existence, condition or contents of the original have been
proved to be admitted in writing by the person against whom it is proved or by
his representative in interest;
(c)
when the original has been destroyed or lost, or when the party offering
evidence of its contents cannot, for any other reason not arising from his own
default or neglect, produce it in reasonable time;
(d)
when the
original is of such a nature as not to be easily movable;
(e)
when the
original is a public document within the meaning of section 74;
(f)
when the original is a document of which a certified copy is permitted
by this Adhiniyam, or by any other law in force in India to be given in
evidence;
(g)
when the originals consist of numerous accounts or other documents which
cannot conveniently be examined in Court, and the fact to be proved is the
general result of the whole collection.
Explanation.—For the purposes of—
(i) clauses (a), (c) and (d), any
secondary evidence of the contents of the document is admissible;
(ii) clause (b), the written admission is admissible;
(iii) clause (e) or (f), a
certified copy of the document, but no other kind of secondary evidence, is
admissible;
(iv) clause (g), evidence may be
given as to the general result of the documents by any person who has examined
them, and who is skilled in the examination of such document.
Section 61
Electronic or digital record.
Nothing in this
Adhiniyam shall apply to deny the admissibility of an electronic or digital
record in the evidence on the ground that it is an electronic or digital record
and such record shall, subject to section 63, have the same legal effect,
validity and enforceability as other document.
Section 62 (Old Corresponding
Sec.65A IEA,1872)
Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic record.
The contents of
electronic records may be proved in accordance with the provisions of section
63.
Section 63 (Old Corresponding
Sec.65B IEA,1872)
Admissibility of electronic records.
(1)
Notwithstanding
anything contained in this Adhiniyam, any information contained in an
electronic record which is printed on paper, stored, recorded or copied in
optical or magnetic media or semiconductor memory which is produced by a
computer or any communication device or otherwise stored, recorded or copied in
any electronic form (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be
deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are
satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be
admissible in any proceedings, without further proof or production of the
original, as evidence or any contents of the original or of any fact stated
therein of which direct evidence would be admissible.
(2)
The conditions referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of a computer
output shall be the following, namely:—
(a) the computer output
containing the information was produced by the computer or communication device
during the period over which the computer or communication device was used
regularly to create, store or process information for the purposes of any
activity regularly carried on over that period by the person having lawful
control over the use of the computer or communication device;
(b) during the said period,
information of the kind contained in the electronic record or of the kind from
which the information so contained is derived was regularly fed into the
computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the said activities;
(c) throughout the material part
of the said period, the computer or communication device was operating properly
or, if not, then in respect of any period in which it was not operating
properly or was out of operation during that part of the period, was not such
as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents; and
(d) the information contained in
the electronic record reproduces or is derived from such information fed into
the computer or communication device in the ordinary course of the said
activities.
(3)
Where over any period, the function of creating, storing or processing
information for the purposes of any activity regularly carried on over that
period as mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (2) was regularly performed by
means of one or more computers or communication device, whether—
(a) in standalone mode; or
(b) on a computer system; or
(c) on a computer network; or
(d) on a computer resource
enabling information creation or providing information processing and storage;
or
(e) through an intermediary,
all the computers
or communication devices used for that purpose during that period shall be
treated for the purposes of this section as constituting a single computer or
communication device; and references in this section to a computer or
communication device shall be construed accordingly.
(4)
In any proceeding where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by
virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things shall
be submitted along with the electronic record at each instance where it is
being submitted for admission, namely:—
(a) identifying the electronic
record containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was
produced;
(b) giving such particulars of
any device involved in the production of that electronic record as may be
appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record was produced
by a computer or a communication device referred to in clauses (a) to
(e) of sub-section (3);
(c) dealing with any of the matters to which the
conditions mentioned in sub-section
(2) relate,
and purporting to
be signed by a person in charge of the computer or communication device or the
management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) and an expert
shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate; and for the purposes
of this sub-section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the
best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it in the certificate
specified in the Schedule.
(5)
For the
purposes of this section,—
(a) information shall be taken to
be supplied to a computer or communication device if it is supplied thereto in
any appropriate form and whether it is so supplied directly or (with or without
human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment;
(b) a computer output shall be
taken to have been produced by a computer or communication device whether it
was produced by it directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of
any appropriate equipment or by other electronic means as referred to in
clauses (a) to (e) of sub-section (3).
Section 64 (Old Corresponding
Sec.66 IEA,1872)
Rules as to notice to produce.
Secondary
evidence of the contents of the documents referred to in clause (a) of section
60, shall not be given unless the party proposing to give such secondary
evidence has previously given to the party in whose possession or power the
document is, or to his advocate or representative, such notice to produce it as
is prescribed by law; and if no notice is prescribed by law, then such notice
as the Court considers reasonable under the circumstances of the case:
Provided that
such notice shall not be required in order to render secondary evidence
admissible in any of the following cases, or in any other case in which the
Court thinks fit to dispense with it:—
(a) when the document to be proved is itself a
notice;
(b) when, from the nature of the
case, the adverse party must know that he will be required to produce it;
(c) when it appears or is proved
that the adverse party has obtained possession of the original by fraud or
force;
(d) when the adverse party or his agent has the
original in Court;
(e) when the adverse party or his agent has admitted
the loss of the document;
(f) when the person in possession
of the document is out of reach of, or not subject to, the process of the
Court.
Section 65
(Old Corresponding Sec.67 IEA,1872)
Proof of signature and
handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document produced.
If a document is alleged to
be signed or to have been written wholly or in part by any person, the
signature or the handwriting of so much of the document as is alleged to be in
that person's handwriting must be proved to be in his handwriting.
Section 66 (Old Corresponding
Sec.67A IEA,1872)
Proof as to electronic signature.
Except in the case of a
secure electronic signature, if the electronic signature of any subscriber is
alleged to have been affixed to an electronic record, the fact that such
electronic signature is the electronic signature of the subscriber must be
proved.
Section 67 (Old Corresponding
Sec.68 IEA,1872)
Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested.
If a document is required by
law to be attested, it shall not be used as evidence until one attesting
witness at least has been called for the purpose of proving its execution, if
there be an attesting witness alive, and subject to the process of the Court
and capable of giving evidence:
Provided that it shall not be
necessary to call an attesting witness in proof of the execution of any
document, not being a will, which has been registered in accordance with the
provisions of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, unless its execution by the
person by whom it purports to have been executed is specifically denied.
Section 68 (Old Corresponding
Sec.69 IEA,1872)
Proof where no attesting witness found.
If no such attesting witness
can be found, it must be proved that the attestation of one attesting witness
at least is in his handwriting, and that the signature of the person executing
the document is in the handwriting of that person.
Section 69 (Old Corresponding
Sec.70 IEA,1872)
Admission of execution by party to attested document.
The admission of a party to
an attested document of its execution by himself shall be sufficient proof of
its execution as against him, though it be a document required by law to be
attested.
Section 70 (Old Corresponding
Sec.71 IEA,1872)
Proof when attesting witness denies execution.
If the attesting witness
denies or does not recollect the execution of the document, its execution may
be proved by other evidence.
Section 71 (Old Corresponding
Sec.72 IEA,1872)
Proof of document not required by law to be attested.
An attested document not required by law to be
attested may be proved as if it was unattested.
Section 72 (Old Corresponding
Sec.73 IEA,1872)
Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved.
(1)
In order to ascertain whether a signature, writing or seal is that of
the person by whom it purports to have been written or made, any signature,
writing, or seal admitted or proved to the satisfaction of the Court to have
been written or made by that person may be compared with the one which is to be
proved, although that signature, writing or seal has not been produced or
proved for any other purpose.
(2)
The Court may direct any person present in Court to write any words or
figures for the purpose of enabling the Court to compare the words or figures
so written with any words or figures alleged to have been written by such
person.
(3)
This
section applies also, with any necessary modifications, to finger impressions.
Section 73 (Old Corresponding
Sec.73A IEA,1872)
Proof as to verification of digital signature.
In order to ascertain whether
a digital signature is that of the person by whom it purports to have been
affixed, the Court may direct—
(a)
that person or the Controller or the Certifying Authority to produce the
Digital Signature Certificate;
(b)
any other person to apply the public key listed in the Digital Signature
Certificate and verify the digital signature purported to have been affixed by
that person.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER V
PUBLIC
DOCUMENTS
Section 74
Public and private documents.
(1)
The
following documents are public documents (Old Corresponding Sec.74 IEA,1872):—
(a) documents forming the acts, or records of the
acts—
(i) of the sovereign authority;
(ii) of official bodies and tribunals; and
(iii) of public officers,
legislative, judicial and executive of India or of a foreign country;
(b) public records kept in any State or Union
territory of private documents.
(2)
All other documents except the documents referred to in sub-section (1)
are private. (Old Corresponding Sec.75 IEA,1872)
Section 75 (Old Corresponding
Sec.76 IEA,1872)
Certified copies of public documents.
Every public
officer having the custody of a public document, which any person has a right
to inspect, shall give that person on demand a copy of it on payment of the
legal fees therefor, together with a certificate written at the foot of such
copy that it is a true copy of such document or part thereof, as the case may
be, and such certificate shall be dated and subscribed by such officer with his
name and his official title, and shall be sealed, whenever such officer is
authorised by law to make use of a seal; and such copies so certified shall be
called certified copies.
Explanation.—Any
officer who, by the ordinary course of official duty, is authorised to deliver
such copies, shall be deemed to have the custody of such documents within the
meaning of this section.
Section 76 (Old Corresponding
Sec.77 IEA,1872)
Proof of documents by production of certified copies.
Such certified
copies may be produced in proof of the contents of the public documents or
parts of the public documents of which they purport to be copies.
Section 77 (Old Corresponding
Sec.78 IEA,1872)
Proof of other official documents.
The following public documents may be proved as
follows:—
(a)
Acts, orders or notifications of the Central Government in any of its
Ministries and Departments or of any State Government or any Department of any
State Government or Union territory Administration—
(i) by the records of the
Departments, certified by the head of those Departments respectively; or
(ii) by any document purporting to be printed by
order of any such Government;
(b)
the proceedings of Parliament or a State Legislature, by the journals of
those bodies respectively, or by published Acts or abstracts, or by copies
purporting to be printed by order of the Government concerned;
(c)
proclamations, orders or Regulations issued by the President of India or
the Governor of a State or the Administrator or Lieutenant Governor of a Union
territory, by copies or extracts contained in the Official Gazette;
(d)
the Acts of the Executive or the proceedings of the Legislature of a
foreign country, by journals published by their authority, or commonly received
in that country as such, or by a copy certified under the seal of the country
or sovereign, or by a recognition thereof in any Central Act;
(e)
the proceedings of a municipal or local body in a State, by a copy of
such proceedings, certified by the legal keeper thereof, or by a printed book
purporting to be published by the authority of such body;
(f)
public documents of any other class in a foreign country, by the
original or by a copy certified by the legal keeper thereof, with a certificate
under the seal of a Notary Public, or of an Indian Consul or diplomatic agent,
that the copy is duly certified by the officer having the legal custody of the
original, and upon proof of the character of the document according to the law
of the foreign country.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER V
PRESUMPTIONS AS TO DOCUMENTS
Section 78 (Old Corresponding
Sec.79 IEA,1872)
Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies.
(1)
The Court shall presume to be genuine every document purporting to be a
certificate, certified copy or other document, which is by law declared to be
admissible as evidence of any particular fact and which purports to be duly
certified by any officer of the Central Government or of a State Government:
Provided that such document
is substantially in the form and purports to be executed in the manner directed
by law in that behalf.
(2)
The Court shall also presume that any officer by whom any such document
purports to be signed or certified, held, when he signed it, the official
character which he claims in such paper.
Section 79 (Old Corresponding
Sec.80 IEA,1872)
Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence, etc.
Whenever
any document is produced before any Court, purporting to be a record or
memorandum of the evidence, or of any part of the evidence, given by a witness
in a judicial proceeding or before any officer authorised by law to take such
evidence or to be a statement or confession by any prisoner or accused person,
taken in accordance with law, and purporting to be signed by any Judge or Magistrate,
or by any such officer as aforesaid, the Court shall presume that—
(i)
the
document is genuine;
(ii)
any statements as to the circumstances under which it was taken,
purporting to be made by the person signing it, are true; and
(iii)
such
evidence, statement or confession was duly taken.
Section 80 (Old Corresponding
Sec.81 IEA,1872)
Presumption as to Gazettes, newspapers, and other documents.
The Court shall
presume the genuineness of every document purporting to be the Official
Gazette, or to be a newspaper or journal, and of every document purporting to
be a document directed by any law to be kept by any person, if such document is
kept substantially in the form required by law and is produced from proper
custody.
Explanation.—For
the purposes of this section and section 92, document is said to be in proper
custody if it is in the place in which, and looked after by the person with
whom such document is required to be kept; but no custody is improper if it is
proved to have had a legitimate origin, or if the circumstances of the
particular case are such as to render that origin probable.
Section 81 (Old Corresponding
Sec.81A IEA,1872)
Presumption as to Gazettes in electronic or digital record.
The Court shall
presume the genuineness of every electronic or digital record purporting to be
the Official Gazette, or purporting to be electronic or digital record directed
by any law to be kept by any person, if such electronic or digital record is
kept substantially in the form required by law and is produced from proper
custody.
Explanation.—For
the purposes of this section and section 93 electronic records are said to be
in proper custody if they are in the place in which, and looked after by the
person with whom such document is required to be kept; but no custody is
improper if it is proved to have had a legitimate origin, or the circumstances
of the particular case are such as to render that origin probable.
Section 82 (Old Corresponding
Sec.83 IEA,1872)
Presumption as to maps or plans made by authority of Government.
The Court shall
presume that maps or plans purporting to be made by the authority of the
Central Government or any State Government were so made, and are accurate; but
maps or plans made for the purposes of any cause must be proved to be accurate.
Section 83
(Old Corresponding Sec.84 IEA,1872)
Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decisions.
The Court shall
presume the genuineness of, every book purporting to be printed or published
under the authority of the Government of any country, and to contain any of the
laws of that country, and of every book purporting to contain reports of
decisions of the Courts of such country.
Section 84 (Old Corresponding
Sec.85 IEA,1872)
Presumption as to powersof-attorney.
The Court shall
presume that every document purporting to be a power-of-attorney, and to have
been executed before, and authenticated by, a Notary Public, or any Court,
Judge, Magistrate, Indian Consul or Vice-Consul, or representative of the
Central Government, was so executed and authenticated.
Section 85 (Old Corresponding
Sec.85A IEA,1872)
Presumption as to electronic agreements.
The Court shall
presume that every electronic record purporting to be an agreement containing
the electronic or digital signature of the parties was so concluded by affixing
the electronic or digital signature of the parties.
Section 86 (Old Corresponding
Sec.85B IEA,1872)
Presumption as to electronic records and electronic signatures.
(1)
In any proceeding involving a secure electronic record, the Court shall
presume unless contrary is proved, that the secure electronic record has not
been altered since the specific point of time to which the secure status
relates.
(2)
In any proceeding, involving secure electronic signature, the Court
shall presume unless the contrary is proved that—
(a) the secure electronic
signature is affixed by subscriber with the intention of signing or approving
the electronic record;
(b) except in the case of a
secure electronic record or a secure electronic signature, nothing in this
section shall create any presumption, relating to authenticity and integrity of
the electronic record or any electronic signature.
Section 87 (Old Corresponding
Sec.85C IEA,1872)
Presumption as to Electronic Signature Certificates.
The
Court shall presume, unless contrary is proved, that the information listed in
an Electronic Signature Certificate is correct, except for information
specified as subscriber information which has not been verified, if the certificate
was accepted by the subscriber.
Section 88 (Old Corresponding
Sec.86 IEA,1872)
Presumption as to certified copies of foreign judicial records.
(1)
The Court may presume that any document purporting to be a certified
copy of any judicial record of any country beyond India is genuine and
accurate, if the document purports to be certified in any manner which is
certified by any representative of the Central Government in or for such
country to be the manner commonly in use in that country for the certification
of copies of judicial records.
(2)
An officer who, with respect to any territory or place outside India is
a Political Agent therefor, as defined in clause (43) of section 3 of the
General Clauses Act, 1897, shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed
to be a representative of the Central Government in and for the country
comprising that territory or place.
Section 89 (Old Corresponding
Sec.87 IEA,1872)
Presumption as to books, maps and charts.
The Court may
presume that any book to which it may refer for information on matters of
public or general interest, and that any published map or chart, the statements
of which are relevant facts, and which is produced for its inspection, was
written and published by the person, and at the time and place, by whom or at
which it purports to have been written or published.
Section 90 (Old Corresponding
Sec.88A IEA,1872)
Presumption as to electronic messages.
The Court may
presume that an electronic message, forwarded by the originator through an
electronic mail server to the addressee to whom the message purports to be
addressed corresponds with the message as fed into his computer for
transmission; but the Court shall not make any presumption as to the person by
whom such message was sent.
Section 91 (Old Corresponding
Sec.89 IEA,1872)
Presumption as to due execution, etc., of documents not produced.
The Court shall
presume that every document, called for and not produced after notice to
produce, was attested, stamped and executed in the manner required by law.
Section 92 (Old Corresponding
Sec.90 IEA,1872)
Presumption as to documents thirty years old.
Where any document,
purporting or proved to be thirty years old, is produced from any custody which
the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume that
the signature and every other part of such document, which purports to be in
the handwriting of any particular person, is in that person's handwriting, and,
in the case of a document executed or attested, that it was duly executed and
attested by the persons by whom it purports to be executed and attested.
Explanation.—The Explanation to section 80 shall
also apply to this section.
Illustrations.
(a) A has been in possession of
landed property for a long time. He produces from his custody deeds relating to
the land showing his titles to it. The custody shall be proper.
(b) A produces deeds relating to
landed property of which he is the mortgagee. The mortgagor is in possession.
The custody shall be proper.
(c) A, a connection of B,
produces deeds relating to lands in B's possession, which were deposited with
him by B for safe custody. The custody shall be proper.
Section 93 (Old Corresponding
Sec.90A IEA,1872)
Presumption as to electronic records five years old.
Where any electronic record,
purporting or proved to be five years old, is produced from any custody which
the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume that
the electronic signature which purports to be the electronic signature of any
particular person was so affixed by him or any person authorised by him in this
behalf.
Explanation.—The Explanation to section 81 shall
also apply to this section.
PART III
ON PROOF
CHAPTER VI
OF THE EXCLUSION OF ORAL EVIDENCE BY DOCUMENTARY
EVIDENCE
Section 94 (Old Corresponding
Sec.91 IEA,1872)
Evidence of terms of
contracts, grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of
document.
When the terms of a contract,
or of a grant, or of any other disposition of property, have been reduced to
the form of a document, and in all cases in which any matter is required by law
to be reduced to the form of a document, no evidence shall be given in proof of
the terms of such contract, grant or other disposition of property, or of such
matter, except the document itself, or secondary evidence of its contents in
cases in which secondary evidence is admissible under the provisions
hereinbefore contained.
Exception 1.—When a public
officer is required by law to be appointed in writing, and when it is shown
that any particular person has acted as such officer, the writing by which he
is appointed need not be proved.
Exception 2.—Wills
admitted to probate in India may be proved by the probate.
Explanation 1.—This
section applies equally to cases in which the contracts, grants or dispositions
of property referred to are contained in one document, and to cases in which
they are contained in more documents than one.
Explanation 2.—Where there are more originals
than one, one original only need be proved.
Explanation 3.—The statement,
in any document whatever, of a fact other than the facts referred to in this
section, shall not preclude the admission of oral evidence as to the same fact.
Illustrations.
(a) If a contract be contained in
several letters, all the letters in which it is contained must be proved.
(b) If a contract is contained in a bill of
exchange, the bill of exchange must be proved.
(c) If a bill of exchange is drawn in a set of
three, one only need be proved.
(d) A contracts, in writing, with
B, for the delivery of indigo upon certain terms. The contract mentions the
fact that B had paid A the price of other indigo contracted for verbally on
another occasion. Oral evidence is offered that no payment was made for the
other indigo. The evidence is admissible.
(e) A gives B a receipt for money
paid by B. Oral evidence is offered of the payment. The evidence is admissible.
Section 95 (Old Corresponding
Sec.92 IEA,1872)
Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement.
When the terms of
any such contract, grant or other disposition of property, or any matter
required by law to be reduced to the form of a document, have been proved
according to section 94, no evidence of any oral agreement or statement shall
be admitted, as between the parties to any such instrument or their
representatives in interest, for the purpose of contradicting, varying, adding
to, or subtracting from, its terms:
Provided that any
fact may be proved which would invalidate any document, or which would entitle
any person to any decree or order relating thereto; such as fraud,
intimidation, illegality, want of due execution, want of capacity in any
contracting party, want or failure of consideration, or mistake in fact or law:
Provided further
that the existence of any separate oral agreement as to any matter on which a
document is silent, and which is not inconsistent with its terms, may be
proved. In considering whether or not this proviso applies, the Court shall
have regard to the degree of formality of the document:
Provided also
that the existence of any separate oral agreement, constituting a condition
precedent to the attaching of any obligation under any such contract, grant or
disposition of property, may be proved:
Provided also
that the existence of any distinct subsequent oral agreement to rescind or
modify any such contract, grant or disposition of property, may be proved,
except in cases in which such contract, grant or disposition of property is by
law required to be in writing, or has been registered according to the law in
force for the time being as to the registration of documents:
Provided also that any usage
or custom by which incidents not expressly mentioned in any contract are
usually annexed to contracts of that description, may be proved:
Provided also that the
annexing of such incident would not be repugnant to, or inconsistent with, the
express terms of the contract:
Provided also that any fact
may be proved which shows in what manner the language of a document is related
to existing facts.
Illustrations.
(a) A policy of insurance is
effected on goods "in ships from Kolkata to Visakhapatnam". The goods
are shipped in a particular ship which is lost. The fact that particular ship
was orally excepted from the policy, cannot be proved.
(b) A agrees absolutely in
writing to pay B one thousand rupees on the 1st March, 2023. The fact that, at
the same time, an oral agreement was made that the money should not be paid
till the 31st March, 2023, cannot be proved.
(c) An estate called "the
Rampur tea estate" is sold by a deed which contains a map of the property
sold. The fact that land not included in the map had always been regarded as
part of the estate and was meant to pass by the deed cannot be proved.
(d) A enters into a written
contract with B to work certain mines, the property of B, upon certain terms. A
was induced to do so by a misrepresentation of B's as to their value. This fact
may be proved.
(e) A institutes a suit against B
for the specific performance of a contract, and also prays that the contract
may be reformed as to one of its provisions, as that provision was inserted in
it by mistake. A may prove that such a mistake was made as would by law entitle
him to have the contract reformed.
(f) A orders goods of B by a
letter in which nothing is said as to the time of payment, and accepts the
goods on delivery. B sues A for the price. A may show that the goods were
supplied on credit for a term still unexpired.
(g) A sells B a horse and
verbally warrants him sound. A gives B a paper in these words—"Bought of A
a horse for thirty thousand rupees". B may prove the verbal warranty.
(h) A hires lodgings of B, and
gives B a card on which is written—"Rooms, ten thousand rupees a
month". A may prove a verbal agreement that these terms were to include
partial board. A hires lodging of B for a year, and a regularly stamped
agreement, drawn up by an advocate, is made between them. It is silent on the
subject of board. A may not prove that board was included in the term verbally.
(i) A applies to B for a debt due
to A by sending a receipt for the money. B keeps the receipt and does not send
the money. In a suit for the amount, A may prove this.
(j) A and B make a contract in
writing to take effect upon the happening of a certain contingency. The writing
is left with B who sues A upon it. A may show the circumstances under which it
was delivered.
Section 96 (Old Corresponding
Sec.93 IEA,1872)
Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous document.
When the language used in a
document is, on its face, ambiguous or defective, evidence may not be given of
facts which would show its meaning or supply its defects.
Illustrations.
(a) A agrees, in writing, to sell
a horse to B for "one lakh rupees or one lakh fifty thousand rupees".
Evidence cannot be given to show which price was to be given.
(b) A deed contains blanks.
Evidence cannot be given of facts which would show how they were meant to be
filled.
Section 97 (Old Corresponding
Sec.94 IEA,1872)
Exclusion of evidence against application of document to existing facts.
When language
used in a document is plain in itself, and when it applies accurately to
existing facts, evidence may not be given to show that it was not meant to
apply to such facts.
Illustration.
A sells to B, by
deed, "my estate at Rampur containing one hundred bighas". A has an
estate at Rampur containing one hundred bighas. Evidence may not be given of
the fact that the estate meant to be sold was one situated at a different place
and of a different size.
Section 98 (Old Corresponding
Sec.95 IEA,1872)
Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts.
When language
used in a document is plain in itself, but is unmeaning in reference to
existing facts, evidence may be given to show that it was used in a peculiar
sense.
Illustration.
A sells to B, by
deed, "my house in Kolkata". A had no house in Kolkata, but it
appears that he had a house at Howrah, of which B had been in possession since
the execution of the deed. These facts may be proved to show that the deed
related to the house at Howrah.
Section 99 (Old Corresponding
Sec.96 IEA,1872)
Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of
several persons.
When the facts
are such that the language used might have been meant to apply to any one, and
could not have been meant to apply to more than one, of several persons or
things, evidence may be given of facts which show which of those persons or
things it was intended to apply to.
Illustrations.
(a) A agrees to sell to B, for
one thousand rupees, "my transparent horse". A has two transparent horses.
Evidence may be given of facts which show which of them was meant.
(b) A agrees to accompany B to
Ramgarh. Evidence may be given of facts showing whether Ramgarh in Rajasthan or
Ramgarh in Uttarakhand was meant.
Section 100 (Old Corresponding
Sec.97 IEA,1872)
Evidence as to application of
language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the whole correctly
applies.
When the language
used applies partly to one set of existing facts, and partly to another set of
existing facts, but the whole of it does not apply correctly to either,
evidence may be given to show to which of the two it was meant to apply.
Illustration.
A agrees to sell
to B "my land at X in the occupation of Y". A has land at X, but not
in the occupation of Y, and he has land in the occupation of Y but it is not at
X. Evidence may be given of facts showing which he meant to sell.
Section 101 (Old
Corresponding Sec.98 IEA,1872)
Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc.
Evidence may be
given to show the meaning of illegible or not commonly intelligible characters,
of foreign, obsolete, technical, local and regional expressions, of
abbreviations and of words used in a peculiar sense.
Illustration.
A, sculptor,
agrees to sell to B, "all my mods". A has both models and modelling
tools. Evidence may be given to show which he meant to sell.
Section 102 (Old
Corresponding Sec.99 IEA,1872)
Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document.
Persons who are
not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest, may give
evidence of any facts tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the
terms of the document.
Illustration.
A and B make a
contract in writing that B shall sell A certain cotton, to be paid for on delivery.
At the same time, they make an oral agreement that three months’ credit shall
be given to A. This could not be shown as between A and B, but it might be
shown by C, if it affected his interests.
Section 103 (Old
Corresponding Sec.100 IEA,1872)
Saving of provisions of Indian Succession Act relating to wills.
Nothing
in this Chapter shall be taken to affect any of the provisions of the Indian
Succession Act, 1925 as to the construction of wills.
PART IV
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER VII
OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF
Section 104 (Old
Corresponding Sec.101 IEA,1872)
Burden of proof.
Whoever desires any Court to
give judgment as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of
facts which he asserts must prove that those facts exist, and when a person is
bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said that the burden of proof
lies on that person.
Illustrations.
(a) A desires a Court to give
judgment that B shall be punished for a crime which A says B has committed. A
must prove that B has committed the crime.
(b) A desires a Court to give
judgment that he is entitled to certain land in the possession of B, by reason
of facts which he asserts, and which B denies, to be true. A must prove the
existence of those facts.
Section 105 (Old
Corresponding Sec.102 IEA,1872)
On whom burden of proof lies.
The burden of proof in a suit
or proceeding lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were
given on either side.
Illustrations.
(a) A sues B for land of which B
is in possession, and which, as A asserts, was left to A by the will of C, B's
father. If no evidence were given on either side, B would be entitled to retain
his possession. Therefore, the burden of proof is on A.
(b) A sues B for money due on a
bond. The execution of the bond is admitted, but B says that it was obtained by
fraud, which A denies. If no evidence were given on either side, A would
succeed, as the bond is not disputed and the fraud is not proved. Therefore,
the burden of proof is on B.
Section 106 (Old
Corresponding Sec.103 IEA,1872)
Burden of proof as to particular fact.
The burden of proof as to any
particular fact lies on that person who wishes the Court to believe in its
existence, unless it is provided by any law that the proof of that fact shall
lie on any particular person.
A prosecutes B
for theft, and wishes the Court to believe that B admitted the theft to C. A
must prove the admission. B wishes the Court to believe that, at the time in
question, he was elsewhere. He must prove it.
Section 107 (Old
Corresponding Sec.104 IEA,1872)
Burden of proving fact to be proved to make evidence admissible.
The burden of
proving any fact necessary to be proved in order to enable any person to give
evidence of any other fact is on the person who wishes to give such evidence.
Illustrations.
(a) A wishes to prove a dying declaration by B. A
must prove B's death.
(b) A wishes to prove, by
secondary evidence, the contents of a lost document. A must prove that the
document has been lost.
Section 108 (Old
Corresponding Sec.105 IEA,1872)
Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions.
When a person is
accused of any offence, the burden of proving the existence of circumstances
bringing the case within any of the General Exceptions in the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 or within any special exception or proviso contained in any other
part of the said Sanhita, or in any law defining the offence, is upon him, and
the Court shall presume the absence of such circumstances.
Illustrations.
(a) A, accused of murder, alleges
that, by reason of unsoundness of mind, he did not know the nature of the act.
The burden of proof is on A.
(b) A, accused of murder, alleges
that, by grave and sudden provocation, he was deprived of the power of
self-control. The burden of proof is on A.
(c) Section 117 of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 provides that whoever, except in the case provided for by
sub-section (2) of section 122, voluntarily causes grievous hurt, shall be
subject to certain punishments. A is charged with voluntarily causing grievous
hurt under section 117. The burden of proving the circumstances bringing the
case under sub-section (2) of section 122 lies on A.
Section 109 (Old
Corresponding Sec.106 IEA,1872)
Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge.
When any fact is especially
within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon
him.
Illustrations.
(a) When a person does an act
with some intention other than that which the character and circumstances of
the act suggest, the burden of proving that intention is upon him.
(b) A is charged with travelling
on a railway without a ticket. The burden of proving that he had a ticket is on
him.
Section 110 (Old
Corresponding Sec.107 IEA,1872)
Burden of proving death of person known to have been alive within thirty
years.
When the question
is whether a man is alive or dead, and it is shown that he was alive within
thirty years, the burden of proving that he is dead is on the person who
affirms it.
Section 111 (Old
Corresponding Sec.108 IEA,1872)
Burden of proving that person is alive who has not been heard of for
seven years.
When the question
is whether a man is alive or dead, and it is proved that he has not been heard
of for seven years by those who would naturally have heard of him if he had
been alive, the burden of proving that he is alive is shifted to the person who
affirms it.
Section 112 (Old
Corresponding Sec.109 IEA,1872)
Burden of proof as to
relationship in the cases of partners, landlord and tenant, principal and
agent.
When the question
is whether persons are partners, landlord and tenant, or principal and agent,
and it has been shown that they have been acting as such, the burden of proving
that they do not stand, or have ceased to stand, to each other in those
relationships respectively, is on the person who affirms it.
Section 113 (Old
Corresponding Sec.110 IEA,1872)
Burden of proof as to ownership.
When the question
is whether any person is owner of anything of which he is shown to be in
possession, the burden of proving that he is not the owner is on the person who
affirms that he is not the owner.
Section 114 (Old
Corresponding Sec.111 IEA,1872)
Proof of good faith in transactions where one party is in relation of
active confidence.
Where there is a
question as to the good faith of a transaction between parties, one of whom
stands to the other in a position of active confidence, the burden of proving
the good faith of the transaction is on the party who is in a position of
active confidence.
(a) The good faith of a sale by a
client to an advocate is in question in a suit brought by the client. The
burden of proving the good faith of the transaction is on the advocate.
(b) The good faith of a sale by a
son just come of age to a father is in question in a suit brought by the son.
The burden of proving the good faith of the transaction is on the father.
Section 115 (Old
Corresponding Sec.111A IEA,1872)
Presumption as to certain offences.
(1)
Where a person is accused of having committed any offence specified in
sub-section (2), in—
(a) any area declared to be a
disturbed area under any enactment for the time being in force, making
provision for the suppression of disorder and restoration and maintenance of
public order; or
(b) any area in which there has
been, over a period of more than one month, extensive disturbance of the public
peace,
and it is shown
that such person had been at a place in such area at a time when firearms or
explosives were used at or from that place to attack or resist the members of
any armed forces or the forces charged with the maintenance of public order
acting in the discharge of their duties, it shall be presumed, unless the
contrary is shown, that such person had committed such offence.
(2)
The
offences referred to in sub-section (1) are the following, namely:—
(a) an offence under section 147,
section 148, section 149 or section 150 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023;
(b) criminal conspiracy or
attempt to commit, or abetment of, an offence under section 149 or section 150
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Section 116 (Old
Corresponding Sec.112 IEA,1872)
Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy.
The fact that any
person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother
and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the
mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate
child of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had
no access to each other at any time when he could have been begotten.
Section 117 (Old
Corresponding Sec.113A IEA,1872)
Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman.
When
the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted
by her husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that she had
committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage
and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to
cruelty, the Court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of
the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative
of her husband.
Explanation.—For the purposes
of this section, "cruelty" shall have the same meaning as in section
86 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Section 118 (Old
Corresponding Sec.113B IEA,1872)
Presumption as to dowry death.
When the question
is whether a person has committed the dowry death of a woman and it is shown
that soon before her death, such woman had been subjected by such person to
cruelty or harassment for, or in connection with, any demand for dowry, the
Court shall presume that such person had caused the dowry death.
Explanation.—For the purposes
of this section, "dowry death" shall have the same meaning as in
section 80 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Section 119 (Old
Corresponding Sec.114 IEA,1872)
Court may presume existence of certain facts.
(1)
The Court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely
to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events,
human conduct and public and private business, in their relation to the facts
of the particular case.
Illustrations.
The Court may presume that—
(a) a man who is in possession 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;
(b) an accomplice is unworthy of
credit, unless he is corroborated in material particulars;
(c) a bill of exchange, accepted
or endorsed, was accepted or endorsed for good consideration;
(d) a thing or state of things
which has been shown to be in existence within a period shorter than that
within which such things or state of things usually cease to exist, is still in
existence;
(e) judicial and official acts have been regularly
performed;
(f) the common course of business has been followed
in particular cases;
(g) evidence which could be and
is not produced would, if produced, be unfavourable to the person who withholds
it;
(h)
if a man refuses to answer a question which he is not compelled to
answer by law, the answer, if given, would be unfavourable to him; (i) when a
document creating an obligation is in the hands of the obligor, the obligation
has been discharged.
(2)
The Court shall also have regard to such facts as the following, in
considering whether such maxims do or do not apply to the particular case
before it:—
(i) as to Illustration (a)—a
shop-keeper has in his bill a marked rupee soon after it was stolen, and cannot
account for its possession specifically, but is continually receiving rupees in
the course of his business;
(ii) as to Illustration (b)—A, a
person of the highest character, is tried for causing a man's death by an act
of negligence in arranging certain machinery. B, a person of equally good
character, who also took part in the arrangement, describes precisely what was
done, and admits and explains the common carelessness of A and himself;
(iii) as to Illustration (b)—a
crime is committed by several persons. A, B and C, three of the criminals, are
captured on the spot and kept apart from each other. Each gives an account of
the crime implicating D, and the accounts corroborate each other in such a
manner as to render previous concert highly improbable;
(iv) as to Illustration (c)—A, the
drawer of a bill of exchange, was a man of business. B, the acceptor, was a
young and ignorant person, completely under A's influence;
(v) as to Illustration (d)—it is
proved that a river ran in a certain course five years ago, but it is known
that there have been floods since that time which might change its course;
(vi) as to Illustration (e)—a
judicial act, the regularity of which is in question, was performed under
exceptional circumstances;
(vii) as to Illustration (f)—the
question is, whether a letter was received. It is shown to have been posted,
but the usual course of the post was interrupted by disturbances;
(viii) as to Illustration (g)—a man
refuses to produce a document which would bear on a contract of small
importance on which he is sued, but which might also injure the feelings and
reputation of his family;
(ix) as to Illustration (h)—a man
refuses to answer a question which he is not compelled by law to answer, but
the answer to it might cause loss to him in matters unconnected with the matter
in relation to which it is asked;
(x) as to Illustration (i)—a bond
is in possession of the obligor, but the circumstances of the case are such
that he may have stolen it.
Section 120 (Old
Corresponding Sec.114A IEA,1872)
Presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecution for rape.
In a prosecution
for rape under sub-section (2) of section 64 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023, where sexual intercourse by the accused is proved and the question is
whether it was without the consent of the woman alleged to have been raped and
such woman states in her evidence before the Court that she did not consent,
the Court shall presume that she did not consent.
Explanation.—In this section,
"sexual intercourse" shall mean any of the acts mentioned in section
63 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
PRODUCTION
AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER
VIII
ESTOPPEL
Section 121 (Old
Corresponding Sec.115 IEA,1872)
Estoppel.
When one person
has, by his declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted
another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon such belief,
neither he nor his representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding
between himself and such person or his representative, to deny the truth of
that thing.
Illustration.
A intentionally
and falsely leads B to believe that certain land belongs to A, and thereby
induces B to buy and pay for it. The land afterwards becomes the property of A,
and A seeks to set aside the sale on the ground that, at the time of the sale,
he had no title. He must not be allowed to prove his want of title.
Section 122 (Old
Corresponding Sec.116 IEA,1872)
Estoppel of tenant and of licensee of person in possession.
No tenant of
immovable property, or person claiming through such tenant, shall, during the
continuance of the tenancy or any time thereafter, be permitted to deny that
the landlord of such tenant had, at the beginning of the tenancy, a title to
such immovable property; and no person who came upon any immovable property by
the licence of the person in possession thereof shall be permitted to deny that
such person had a title to such possession at the time when such licence was
given.
Section 123 (Old
Corresponding Sec.117 IEA,1872)
Estoppel of acceptor of bill of exchange, bailee or licensee.
No acceptor of a
bill of exchange shall be permitted to deny that the drawer had authority to
draw such bill or to endorse it; nor shall any bailee or licensee be permitted
to deny that his bailor or licensor had, at the time when the bailment or
licence commenced, authority to make such bailment or grant such licence.
Explanation 1.—The acceptor
of a bill of exchange may deny that the bill was really drawn by the person by
whom it purports to have been drawn.
Explanation 2.—If a bailee
delivers the goods bailed to a person other than the bailor, he may prove that
such person had a right to them as against the bailor.
PART IV
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER IX
Section 124 (Old Corresponding
Sec.118 IEA,1872)
Who may testify.
All persons shall
be competent to testify unless the Court considers that they are prevented from
understanding the questions put to them, or from giving rational answers to
those questions, by tender years, extreme old age, disease, whether of body or
mind, or any other cause of the same kind.
Explanation.—A
person of unsound mind is not incompetent to testify, unless he is prevented by
his unsoundness of mind from understanding the questions put to him and giving
rational answers to them.
Section 125 (Old
Corresponding Sec.119 IEA,1872)
Witness unable to communicate verbally.
A witness who is
unable to speak may give his evidence in any other manner in which he can make
it intelligible, as by writing or by signs; but such writing must be written
and the signs made in open Court and evidence so given shall be deemed to be
oral evidence:
Provided that if
the witness is unable to communicate verbally, the Court shall take the
assistance of an interpreter or a special educator in recording the statement,
and such statement shall be videographed.
Section 126 (Old
Corresponding Sec.120 IEA,1872)
Competency of husband and wife as witnesses in certain cases.
(1)
In all civil proceedings the parties to the suit, and the husband or
wife of any party to the suit, shall be competent witnesses.
(2)
In criminal proceedings against any person, the husband or wife of such
person, respectively, shall be a competent witness.
Section 127 (Old
Corresponding Sec.121 IEA,1872)
Judges and Magistrates.
No Judge or
Magistrate shall, except upon the special order of some Court to which he is
subordinate, be compelled to answer any question as to his own conduct in Court
as such Judge or Magistrate, or as to anything which came to his knowledge in
Court as such Judge or Magistrate; but he may be examined as to other matters
which occurred in his presence whilst he was so acting.
Illustrations.
(a)
A, on his trial before the Court of Session, says that a deposition was
improperly taken by B, the Magistrate. B cannot be compelled to answer
questions as to this, except upon the special order of a superior Court.
(b) A is accused before the Court
of Session of having given false evidence before B, a Magistrate. B cannot be
asked what A said, except upon the special order of the superior Court.
(c) A is accused before the Court
of Session of attempting to murder a police officer whilst on his trial before
B, a Sessions Judge. B may be examined as to what occurred.
Section 128 (Old Corresponding
Sec.122 IEA,1872)
Communications during marriage.
No person who is
or has been married, shall be compelled to disclose any communication made to
him during marriage by any person to whom he is or has been married; nor shall
he be permitted to disclose any such communication, unless the person who made
it, or his representative in interest, consents, except in suits between
married persons, or proceedings in which one married person is prosecuted for
any crime committed against the other.
Section 129 (Old
Corresponding Sec.123 IEA,1872)
Evidence as to affairs of State.
No one shall be
permitted to give any evidence derived from unpublished official records
relating to any affairs of State, except with the permission of the officer at
the head of the department concerned, who shall give or withhold such
permission as he thinks fit.
Section 130 (Old
Corresponding Sec.124 IEA,1872)
Official communications.
No public officer
shall be compelled to disclose communications made to him in official
confidence, when he considers that the public interests would suffer by the
disclosure.
Section 131 (Old
Corresponding Sec.125 IEA,1872)
Information as to commission of offences.
No Magistrate or
police officer shall be compelled to say when he got any information as to the
commission of any offence, and no revenue officer shall be compelled to say
when he got any information as to the commission of any offence against the
public revenue.
Explanation.—"revenue
officer" means any officer employed in or about the business of any branch
of the public revenue.
Section 132
(1)
No advocate, shall at any time be permitted, unless with his client's
express consent, to disclose any communication made to him in the course and
for the purpose of his service as such advocate, by or on behalf of his client,
or to state the contents or condition of any document with which he has become
acquainted in the course and for the purpose of his professional service, or to
disclose any advice given by him to his client in the course and for the
purpose of such service (Old Corresponding Sec.126 IEA,1872):
Provided that nothing in this section shall
protect from disclosure of—
(a) any such communication made in furtherance of
any illegal purpose;
(b) any fact observed by any
advocate, in the course of his service as such, showing that any crime or fraud
has been committed since the commencement of his service.
(2)
It is immaterial whether the attention of such advocate referred to in
the proviso to sub-section (1), was or was not directed to such fact by or on
behalf of his client. (Old Corresponding Sec.126 IEA,1872)
Explanation.—The obligation
stated in this section continues after the professional service has ceased.
Illustrations.
(a) A, a client, says to B, an
advocate—"I have committed forgery, and I wish you to defend me". As
the defence of a man known to be guilty is not a criminal purpose, this
communication is protected from disclosure.
(b) A, a client, says to B, an
advocate—"I wish to obtain possession of property by the use of a forged
deed on which I request you to sue". This communication, being made in
furtherance of a criminal purpose, is not protected from disclosure.
(c) A, being charged with
embezzlement, retains B, an advocate, to defend him. In the course of the
proceedings, B observes that an entry has been made in A's account book,
charging A with the sum said to have been embezzled, which entry was not in the
book at the commencement of his professional service. This being a fact
observed by B in the course of his service, showing that a fraud has been
committed since the commencement of the proceedings, it is not protected from
disclosure.
(3)
The provisions of this section shall apply to interpreters, and the
clerks or employees of advocates. (Old Corresponding Sec.127 IEA,1872)
Section 133 (Old
Corresponding Sec.128 IEA,1872)
Privilege not waived by volunteering evidence.
If any party to a
suit gives evidence therein at his own instance or otherwise, he shall not be
deemed to have consented thereby to such disclosure as is mentioned in section
132; and, if any party to a suit or proceeding calls any such advocate, as a
witness, he shall be deemed to have consented to such disclosure only if he
questions such advocate, on matters which, but for such question, he would not
be at liberty to disclose.
Section 134 (Old
Corresponding Sec.129 IEA,1872)
Confidential communication with legal advisers.
No one shall be
compelled to disclose to the Court any confidential communication which has
taken place between him and his legal adviser, unless he offers himself as a
witness, in which case he may be compelled to disclose any such communications
as may appear to the Court necessary to be known in order to explain any
evidence which he has given, but no others.
Section 135 (Old
Corresponding Sec.130 IEA,1872)
Production of title-deeds of witness not a party.
No witness who is
not a party to a suit shall be compelled to produce his title-deeds to any
property, or any document in virtue of which he holds any property as pledgee
or mortgagee or any document the production of which might tend to criminate
him, unless he has agreed in writing to produce them with the person seeking
the production of such deeds or some person through whom he claims.
Section 136 (Old
Corresponding Sec.131 IEA,1872)
Production of documents or
electronic records which another person, having possession, could refuse to
produce.
No one shall be
compelled to produce documents in his possession or electronic records under
his control, which any other person would be entitled to refuse to produce if
they were in his possession or control, unless such last-mentioned person
consents to their production.
Section 137 (Old
Corresponding Sec.132 IEA,1872)
Witness not excused from answering on ground that answer will criminate.
A witness shall
not be excused from answering any question as to any matter relevant to the
matter in issue in any suit or in any civil or criminal proceeding, upon the
ground that the answer to such question will criminate, or may tend directly or
indirectly to criminate, such witness, or that it will expose, or tend directly
or indirectly to expose, such witness to a penalty or forfeiture of any kind:
Provided that no
such answer, which a witness shall be compelled to give, shall subject him to
any arrest or prosecution, or be proved against him in any criminal proceeding,
except a prosecution forgiving false evidence by such answer.
Section 138 (Old
Corresponding Sec.133 IEA,1872)
Accomplice.
An accomplice shall be a
competent witness against an accused person; and a conviction is not illegal if
it proceeds upon the corroborated testimony of an accomplice.
Section 139 (Old
Corresponding Sec.134 IEA,1872)
No particular number of witnesses shall in any
case be required for the proof of any fact.
PART IV
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER X
OF EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Section 140 (Old
Corresponding Sec.135 IEA,1872)
Order of production and examination of witnesses.
The order in
which witnesses are produced and examined shall be regulated by the law and
practice for the time being relating to civil and criminal procedure
respectively, and, in the absence of any such law, by the discretion of the
Court.
Section 141 (Old
Corresponding Sec.136 IEA,1872)
Judge to decide as to admissibility of evidence.
(1)
When either party proposes to give evidence of any fact, the Judge may
ask the party proposing to give the evidence in what manner the alleged fact,
if proved, would be relevant; and the Judge shall admit the evidence if he
thinks that the fact, if proved, would be relevant, and not otherwise.
(2)
If the fact proposed to be proved is one of which evidence is admissible
only upon proof of some other fact, such last mentioned fact must be proved
before evidence is given of the fact first mentioned, unless the party
undertakes to give proof of such fact, and the Court is satisfied with such
undertaking.
(3)
If the relevancy of one alleged fact depends upon another alleged fact
being first proved, the Judge may, in his discretion, either permit evidence of
the first fact to be given before the second fact is proved, or require
evidence to be given of the second fact before evidence is given of the first
fact.
Illustrations.
(a) It is proposed to prove a
statement about a relevant fact by a person alleged to be dead, which statement
is relevant under section 26. The fact that the person is dead must be proved
by the person proposing to prove the statement, before evidence is given of the
statement.
(b) It is proposed to prove, by a
copy, the contents of a document said to be lost. The fact that the original is
lost must be proved by the person proposing to produce the copy, before the
copy is produced.
(c) A is accused of receiving
stolen property knowing it to have been stolen. It is proposed to prove that he
denied the possession of the property. The relevancy of the denial depends on
the identity of the property. The Court may, in its discretion, either require
the property to be identified before the denial of the possession is proved, or
permit the denial
of the possession to be proved before the property is identified.
(d) It is proposed to prove a
fact A which is said to have been the cause or effect of a fact in issue. There
are several intermediate facts B, C and D which must be shown to exist before
the fact A can be regarded as the cause or effect of the fact in issue. The
Court may either permit A to be proved before B, C or D is proved, or may
require proof of B, C and D before permitting proof of A.
Section 142 (Old
Corresponding Sec.137 IEA,1872)
Examination of witnesses.
(1)
The examination of a witness by the party who calls him shall be called
his examination-in-chief.
(2)
The examination
of a witness by the adverse party shall be called his cross-examination.
(3)
The examination of a witness, subsequent to the cross-examination, by
the party who called him, shall be called his re-examination.
Section 143 (Old
Corresponding Sec.138 IEA,1872)
Order of examinations.
(1)
Witnesses shall be first examined-in-chief, then (if the adverse party
so desires) cross-examined, then (if the party calling him so desires)
re-examined.
(2)
The examination-in-chief and cross-examination must relate to relevant
facts, but the cross-examination need not be confined to the facts to which the
witness testified on his examination-in-chief.
(3)
The re-examination shall be directed to the explanation of matters
referred to in cross-examination; and, if new matter is, by permission of the
Court, introduced in re-examination, the adverse party may further
cross-examine upon that matter.
Section 144 (Old
Corresponding Sec.139 IEA,1872)
Crossexamination of person called to produce a document.
A person summoned to produce
a document does not become a witness by the mere fact that he produces it, and
cannot be cross-examined unless and until he is called as a witness.
Section 145 (Old
Corresponding Sec.140 IEA,1872)
Witnesses to character.
Witnesses to character may be cross-examined and
re-examined.
Leading questions.
(1)
Any question suggesting the answer which the person putting it wishes or
expects to receive, is called a leading question. (Old Corresponding Sec.141
IEA,1872)
(2)
Leading questions must not, if objected to by the adverse party, be
asked in an examination-in-chief, or in a re-examination, except with the
permission of the Court. (Old Corresponding Sec.142 IEA,1872)
(3)
The Court shall permit leading questions as to matters which are
introductory or undisputed, or which have, in its opinion, been already
sufficiently proved. (Old Corresponding Sec.142 IEA,1872)
(4)
Leading questions may be asked in cross-examination. (Old Corresponding
Sec.143 IEA,1872)
Section 147 (Old Corresponding
Sec.144 IEA,1872)
Evidence as to matters in writing.
Any witness may
be asked, while under examination, whether any contract, grant or other
disposition of property, as to which he is giving evidence, was not contained
in a document, and if he says that it was, or if he is about to make any
statement as to the contents of any document, which, in the opinion of the
Court, ought to be produced, the adverse party may object to such evidence
being given until such document is produced, or until facts have been proved
which entitle the party who called the witness to give secondary evidence of
it.
Explanation.—A witness may
give oral evidence of statements made by other persons about the contents of
documents if such statements are in themselves relevant facts.
Illustration.
The question is, whether A
assaulted B. C deposes that he heard A say to D—"B wrote a letter accusing
me of theft, and I will be revenged on him". This statement is relevant,
as showing A's motive for the assault, and evidence may be given of it, though
no other evidence is given about the letter.
Section 148 (Old
Corresponding Sec.145 IEA,1872)
Cross-examination as to previous statements in writing.
A witness may be
cross-examined as to previous statements made by him in writing or reduced into
writing, and relevant to matters in question, without such writing being shown
to him, or being proved; but, if it is intended to contradict him by the
writing, his attention must, before the writing can be proved, be called to
those parts of it which are to be used for the purpose of contradicting him.
Section 149 (Old
Corresponding Sec.146 IEA,1872)
Questions lawful in cross-examination.
When a witness is
cross-examined, he may, in addition to the questions hereinbefore referred to,
be asked any questions which tend—
(a)
to test
his veracity; or
(b)
to
discover who he is and what is his position in life; or
(c)
to shake his credit, by injuring his character, although the answer to
such questions might tend directly or indirectly to criminate him, or might
expose or tend directly or indirectly to expose him to a penalty or forfeiture:
Provided that in a
prosecution for an offence under section 64, section 65, section 66, section
67, section 68, section 69, section 70 or section 71 of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 or for attempt to commit any such offence, where the question of
consent is an issue, it shall not be permissible to adduce evidence or to put
questions in the cross-examination of the victim as to the general immoral
character, or previous sexual experience, of such victim with any person for
proving such consent or the quality of consent.
Section 150 (Old
Corresponding Sec.147 IEA,1872)
When witness to be compelled to answer.
If any such question relates
to a matter relevant to the suit or proceeding, the provisions of section 137
shall apply thereto.
Section 151 (Old
Corresponding Sec.148 IEA,1872)
Court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness compelled
to answer.
(1)
If any such question relates to a matter not relevant to the suit or
proceeding, except in so far as it affects the credit of the witness by
injuring his character, the Court shall decide whether or not the witness shall
be compelled to answer it, and may, if it thinks fit, warn the witness that he
is not obliged to answer it.
(2)
In exercising its discretion, the Court shall have regard to the
following considerations, namely:—
(a) such questions are proper if
they are of such a nature that the truth of the imputation conveyed by them
would seriously affect the opinion of the Court as to the credibility of the
witness on the matter to which he testifies;
(b) such questions are improper
if the imputation which they convey relates to matters so remote in time, or of
such a character, that the truth of the imputation would not affect, or would
affect in a slight degree, the opinion of the Court as to the credibility of
the witness on the matter to which he testifies;
(c) such questions are improper
if there is a great disproportion between the importance of the imputation made
against the witness's character and the importance of his evidence;
(d) the Court may, if it sees
fit, draw, from the witness's refusal to answer, the inference that the answer
if given would be unfavourable.
Section
152 (Old Corresponding Sec.149 IEA,1872)
Question not to be asked without reasonable grounds.
No such question as is
referred to in section 151 ought to be asked, unless the person asking it has
reasonable grounds for thinking that the imputation which it conveys is well-founded.
Illustrations.
(a) An advocate is instructed by
another advocate that an important witness is a dacoit. This is a reasonable
ground for asking the witness whether he is a dacoit.
(b) An advocate is informed by a
person in Court that an important witness is a dacoit. The informant, on being
questioned by the advocate, gives satisfactory reasons for his statement. This
is a reasonable ground for asking the witness whether he is a dacoit.
(c) A witness, of whom nothing
whatever is known, is asked at random whether he is a dacoit. There are here no
reasonable grounds for the question.
(d) A witness, of whom nothing
whatever is known, being questioned as to his mode of life and means of living,
gives unsatisfactory answers. This may be a reasonable ground for asking him if
he is a dacoit.
Section 153 (Old
Corresponding Sec.150 IEA,1872)
Procedure of Court in case of question being asked without reasonable
grounds.
If the Court is
of opinion that any such question was asked without reasonable grounds, it may,
if it was asked by any advocate, report the circumstances of the case to the
High Court or other authority to which such advocate is subject in the exercise
of his profession.
Section 154 (Old
Corresponding Sec.151 IEA,1872)
Indecent and scandalous questions.
The Court may
forbid any questions or inquiries which it regards as indecent or scandalous,
although such questions or inquiries may have some bearing on the questions
before the Court, unless they relate to facts in issue, or to matters necessary
to be known in order to determine whether or not the facts in issue existed.
Section 155 (Old
Corresponding Sec.152 IEA,1872)
Questions intended to insult or annoy.
The Court shall
forbid any question which appears to it to be intended to insult or annoy, or
which, though proper in itself, appears to the Court needlessly offensive in
form.
Section 156 (Old
Corresponding Sec.153 IEA,1872)
Exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing
veracity.
When
a witness has been asked and has answered any question which is relevant to the
inquiry only in so far as it tends to shake his credit by injuring his
character, no evidence shall be given to contradict him; but, if he answers
falsely, he may afterwards be charged with giving false evidence.
Exception 1.—If a witness is
asked whether he has been previously convicted of any crime and denies it,
evidence may be given of his previous conviction.
Exception 2.—If a witness is
asked any question tending to impeach his impartiality, and answers it by
denying the facts suggested, he may be contradicted.
Illustrations.
(a) A claim against an
underwriter is resisted on the ground of fraud. The claimant is asked whether,
in a former transaction, he had not made a fraudulent claim. He denies it.
Evidence is offered to show that he did make such a claim. The evidence is
inadmissible.
(b) A witness is asked whether he
was not dismissed from a situation for dishonesty. He denies it. Evidence is
offered to show that he was dismissed for dishonesty. The evidence is not
admissible.
(c) A affirms that on a certain
day he saw B at Goa. A is asked whether he himself was not on that day at
Varanasi. He denies it. Evidence is offered to show that A was on that day at
Varanasi. The evidence is admissible, not as contradicting A on a fact which
affects his credit, but as contradicting the alleged fact that B was seen on
the day in question in Goa. In each of these cases, the witness might, if his
denial was false, be charged with giving false evidence.
(d) A is asked whether his family
has not had a blood feud with the family of B against whom he gives evidence.
He denies it. He may be contradicted on the ground that the question tends to
impeach his impartiality.
Section 157 (Old
Corresponding Sec.154 IEA,1872)
Question by party to his own witness.
(1)
The Court may, in its discretion, permit the person who calls a witness
to put any question to him which might be put in cross-examination by the
adverse party.
(2)
Nothing in this section shall disentitle the person so permitted under
sub-section (1), to rely on any part of the evidence of such witness.
Section 158 (Old
Corresponding Sec.155 IEA,1872)
Impeaching credit of witness.
The credit of a witness may
be impeached in the following ways by the adverse party, or, with the consent
of the Court, by the party who calls him—
(a)
by the evidence of persons who testify that they, from their knowledge
of the witness, believe him to be unworthy of credit;
(b)
by proof that the witness has been bribed, or has accepted the offer of
a bribe, or has received any other corrupt inducement to give his evidence;
(c)
by proof of former statements inconsistent with any part of his evidence
which is liable to be contradicted.
Explanation.—A witness
declaring another witness to be unworthy of credit may not, upon his
examination-in-chief, give reasons for his belief, but he may be asked his
reasons in cross-examination, and the answers which he gives cannot be
contradicted, though, if they are false, he may afterwards be charged with giving
false evidence.
Illustrations.
(a) A sues B for the price of
goods sold and delivered to B. C says that he delivered the goods to B.
Evidence is offered to show that, on a previous occasion, he said that he had
not delivered goods to B. The evidence is admissible.
(b) A is accused of the murder of
B. C says that B, when dying, declared that A had given B the wound of which he
died. Evidence is offered to show that, on a previous occasion, C said that B,
when dying, did not declare that A had given B the wound of which he died. The
evidence is admissible.
Section 159 (Old
Corresponding Sec.156 IEA,1872)
Questions tending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact, admissible.
When a witness
whom it is intended to corroborate gives evidence of any relevant fact, he may
be questioned as to any other circumstances which he observed at or near to the
time or place at which such relevant fact occurred, if the Court is of opinion
that such circumstances, if proved, would corroborate the testimony of the witness
as to the relevant fact which he testifies.
Illustration.
A, an accomplice,
gives an account of a robbery in which he took part. He describes various
incidents unconnected with the robbery which occurred on his way to and from
the place where it was committed. Independent evidence of these facts may be
given in order to corroborate his evidence as to the robbery itself.
Section 160 (Old
Corresponding Sec.157 IEA,1872)
Former statements of witness may be proved to corroborate later
testimony as to same fact.
In order to
corroborate the testimony of a witness, any former statement made by such
witness relating to the same fact, at or about the time when the fact took
place, or before any authority legally competent to investigate the fact, may
be proved.
Section 161 (Old
Corresponding Sec.158 IEA,1872)
What matters may be proved in
connection with proved statement relevant under section 26 or 27.
Whenever any
statement, relevant under section 26 or 27, is proved, all matters may be
proved either in order to contradict or to corroborate it, or in order to
impeach or confirm the credit of the person by whom it was made, which might
have been proved if that person had been called as a witness and had denied
upon cross-examination the truth of the matter suggested.
Section
162 (Old Corresponding Sec.159 IEA,1872)
Refreshing memory.
(1)
A witness may, while under examination, refresh his memory by referring
to any writing made by himself at the time of the transaction concerning which
he is questioned, or so soon afterwards that the Court considers it likely that
the transaction was at that time fresh in his memory:
Provided that the
witness may also refer to any such writing made by any other person, and read
by the witness within the time aforesaid, if when he read it, he knew it to be
correct.
(2)
Whenever a witness may refresh his memory by reference to any document,
he may, with the permission of the Court, refer to a copy of such document:
Provided that the Court be
satisfied that there is sufficient reason for the non-production of the
original:
Provided further that an
expert may refresh his memory by reference to professional treatises.
Section 163 (Old
Corresponding Sec.160 IEA,1872)
Testimony to facts stated in document mentioned in section 162.
A witness may
also testify to facts mentioned in any such document as is mentioned in section
162, although he has no specific recollection of the facts themselves, if he is
sure that the facts were correctly recorded in the document.
Illustration.
A book-keeper may
testify to facts recorded by him in books regularly kept in the course of
business, if he knows that the books were correctly kept, although he has
forgotten the particular transactions entered.
Section 164 (Old Corresponding
Sec.161 IEA,1872)
Right of adverse party as to writing used to refresh memory.
Any writing
referred to under the provisions of the two last preceding sections shall be
produced and shown to the adverse party if he requires it; such party may, if
he pleases, cross-examine the witness thereupon.
Section 165 (Old
Corresponding Sec.162 IEA,1872)
Production of documents.
(1)
A witness summoned to produce a document shall, if it is in his
possession or power, bring it to Court, notwithstanding any objection which
there may be to its production or to its admissibility:
Provided that the
validity of any such objection shall be decided on by the Court.
(2)
The Court, if it sees fit, may inspect the document, unless it refers to
matters of State, or take other evidence to enable it to determine on its
admissibility.
(3)
If for such a purpose it is necessary to cause any document to be
translated, the Court may, if it thinks fit, direct the translator to keep the
contents secret, unless the document is to be given in evidence and, if the
interpreter disobeys such direction, he shall be held to have committed an
offence under section 198 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023:
Provided that no Court shall
require any communication between the Ministers and the President of India to
be produced before it.
Section 166 (Old
Corresponding Sec.163 IEA,1872)
Giving, as evidence, of document called for and produced on notice.
When a party
calls for a document which he has given the other party notice to produce, and such
document is produced and inspected by the party calling for its production, he
is bound to give it as evidence if the party producing it requires him to do
so.
Section 167 (Old
Corresponding Sec.164 IEA,1872)
Using, as evidence, of document production of which was refused on
notice.
When a party
refuses to produce a document which he has had notice to produce, he cannot
afterwards use the document as evidence without the consent of the other party
or the order of the Court.
Illustration.
A sues B on an
agreement and gives B notice to produce it. At the trial, A calls for the
document and B refuses to produce it. A gives secondary evidence of its
contents. B seeks to produce the document itself to contradict the secondary
evidence given by A, or in order to show that the agreement is not stamped. He
cannot do so.
Section 168 (Old
Corresponding Sec.165 IEA,1872)
Judge's power to put questions or order production.
The Judge may, in
order to discover or obtain proof of relevant facts, ask any question he
considers necessary, in any form, at any time, of any witness, or of the
parties about any fact; and may order the production of any document or thing;
and neither the parties nor their representatives shall be entitled to make any
objection to any such question or order, nor, without the leave of the Court,
to cross-examine any witness upon any answer given in reply to any such
question:
Provided that the judgment
must be based upon facts declared by this Adhiniyam to be relevant, and duly proved:
Provided
further that this section shall not authorise any Judge to compel any witness
to answer any question, or to produce any document which such witness would be
entitled to refuse to answer or produce under sections 127 to 136, both
inclusive, if the question were asked or the document were called for by the
adverse party; nor shall the Judge ask any question which it would be improper
for any other person to ask under section 151 or 152; nor shall he dispense
with primary evidence of any document, except in the cases hereinbefore
excepted.
PART IV
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER XI
OF IMPROPER ADMISSION AND REJECTION OF EVIDENCE
Section 169 (Old
Corresponding Sec.167 IEA,1872)
No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence.
The improper
admission or rejection of evidence shall not be ground of itself for a new
trial or reversal of any decision in any case, if it shall appear to the Court
before which such objection is raised that, independently of the evidence
objected to and admitted, there was sufficient evidence to justify the
decision, or that, if the rejected evidence had been received, it ought not to
have varied the decision.
PART IV
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER XII
REPEAL AND SAVINGS
Section 170 (Old
Corresponding Sec.2 IEA,1872)
Repeal and savings.
(1)
The Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 is hereby repealed.
(2)
Notwithstanding such repeal, if, immediately before the date on which
this Adhiniyam comes into force, there is any application, trial, inquiry,
investigation, proceeding or appeal pending, then, such application, trial,
inquiry, investigation, proceeding or appeal shall be dealt with under the
provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, as in force immediately before
such commencement, as if this Adhiniyam had not come into force.
THE SCHEDULE
Schedule
CERTIFICATE
PART A
(To be filled by
the Party)
I, _____________________ (Name),
Son/daughter/spouse of ___________________
residing/employed at __________________________
do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely
state and submit as follows:—
I have produced electronic
record/output of the digital record taken from the following device/digital
record source (tick mark):—
Computer / Storage Media I__I DVR I__I Mobile
I__I Flash Drive I__I
CD/DVD I__I Server I__I Cloud I__I Other I__I
Other: ________________________________________
Make & Model: _______________ Color:
_______________
Serial Number: _______________
IMEI/UIN/UID/MAC/Cloud ID_____________________
(as applicable)
and any other relevant information, if any,
about the device/digital record____(specify).
The digital device or the
digital record source was under the lawful control for regularly creating,
storing or processing information for the purposes of carrying out regular
activities and during this period, the computer or the communication device was
working properly and the relevant information was regularly fed into the
computer during the ordinary course of business. If the computer/digital device
at any point of time was not working properly or out of operation, then it has
not affected the electronic/digital record or its accuracy. The digital device
or the source of the digital record is:—
Owned I__I Maintained I__I Managed I__I Operated
I__I
by me (select as applicable).
I state that the HASH value/s of the
electronic/digital record/s is _________________, obtained
through the following algorithm:—
I__I SHA1:
I__I SHA256:
I__I MD5:
Other__________________ (Legally acceptable
standard)
(Hash report to be enclosed with the
certificate)
(Name and signature)
Date (DD/MM/YYYY): _____
Time (IST): ________hours (In 24 hours format)
Place: ____________
PART B
(To be filled by
the Expert)
I,
____________________ (Name), Son/daughter/spouse of _____________________
residing/employed at _________________________
do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely
state and submit as follows:—
The produced electronic
record/output of the digital record are obtained from the following
device/digital record source (tick mark):—
Computer / Storage Media I__I DVR I__I Mobile
I__I Flash Drive I__I
CD/DVD I__I Server I__I Cloud I__I Other I__I
Other: ________________________________________
Make & Model: _______________ Color: _______________
Serial Number: _______________
IMEI/UIN/UID/MAC/Cloud ID_____________________
(as applicable)
and any other relevant information, if any,
about the device/digital record_______(specify).
I state that the HASH value/s of the
electronic/digital record/s is _____________________,
obtained through the following algorithm:—
SHA1:
SHA256:
MD5:
Other__________________ (Legally acceptable
standard)
(Hash report to be enclosed with the
certificate)
(Name, designation and signature)
Date (DD/MM/YYYY): _____
Time (IST): ________hours (In 24 hours format)
Place: ____________