THE BHARATIYA SAKSHYA ADHINIYAM, 2023 

________ 

ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS 

________ 

PART I 

CHAPTER I 

PRELIMINARY 

SECTIONS 

1. Short title, application and commencement. 

2. Definitions. 

PART II 

CHAPTER II 

RELEVANCY OF FACTS 

3. Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts. 

Closely connected facts 

4. Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction. 

5. Facts which are occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue or relevant facts. 

6. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct. 

7. Facts necessary to explain or introduce fact in issue or relevant facts. 

8. Things said or done by conspirator in reference to common design. 

9. When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant. 

10. Facts tending to enable Court to determine amount are relevant in suits for damages. 

11. Facts relevant when right or custom is in question. 

12. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body or bodily feeling. 

13. Facts bearing on question whether act was accidental or intentional. 

14. Existence of course of business when relevant. 

15. Admission defined. 

16. Admission by party to proceeding or his agent. 

Admissions 

17. Admissions by persons whose position must be proved as against party to suit. 

18. Admissions by persons expressly referred to by party to suit. 

19. Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf. 

20. When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant. 

21. Admissions in civil cases when relevant. 

22. Confession caused by inducement, threat, coercion or promise, when irrelevant in criminal 

proceeding. 

23. Confession to police officer. 

24. Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial 

for same offence. 

25. Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop. 

1 

 
 
 
SECTIONS 

Statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses 

26. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is 

relevant. 

27. Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, truth of facts therein 

stated. 

28. Entries in books of account when relevant. 

Statements made under special circumstances 

29. Relevancy of entry in public record or an electronic record made in performance of duty. 

30. Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans. 

31. Relevancy of statement as to fact of public nature contained in certain Acts or notifications. 

32. Relevancy of statements as to any law contained in law books including electronic or digital 

form. 

How much of a statement is to be proved 

33. What evidence to be given when statement forms part of a conversation, document, electronic 

record, book or series of letters or papers. 

Judgments of Courts when relevant 

34. Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial. 

35. Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction. 

36. Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in             

section 35. 

37. Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in sections 34, 35 and 36 when relevant. 

38. Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved. 

Opinions of third persons when relevant 

39. Opinions of experts. 

40. Facts bearing upon opinions of experts. 

41. Opinion as to handwriting and signature, when relevant. 

42. Opinion as to existence of general custom or right, when relevant. 

43. Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant. 

44. Opinion on relationship, when relevant. 

45. Grounds of opinion, when relevant. 

Character when relevant 

46. In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed, irrelevant. 

47. In criminal cases previous good character relevant. 

48. Evidence of character or previous sexual experience not relevant in certain cases. 

49. Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply. 

50. Character as affecting damages. 

2 

 
 
 
PART III 

ON PROOF 

CHAPTER III 

FACTS WHICH NEED NOT BE PROVED 

SECTIONS. 

51. Fact judicially noticeable need not be proved. 

52. Facts of which Court shall take judicial notice. 

53. Facts admitted need not be proved. 

CHAPTER IV 

OF ORAL EVIDENCE 

54. Proof of facts by oral evidence. 

55. Oral evidence to be direct. 

CHAPTER V 

OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 

56. Proof of contents of documents. 

57. Primary evidence. 

58. Secondary evidence. 

59. Proof of documents by primary evidence. 

60. Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents maybe given. 

61. Electronic or digital record. 

62. Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic record. 

63. Admissibility of electronic records. 

64. Rules as to notice to produce. 

65. Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document 

produced. 

66. Proof as to electronic signature. 

67. Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested. 

68. Proof where no attesting witness found. 

69. Admission of execution by party to attested document. 

70. Proof when attesting witness denies execution. 

71. Proof of document not required by law to be attested. 

72. Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved. 

73. Proof as to verification of digital signature. 

Public documents 

74. Public and private documents. 

75. Certified copies of public documents. 

3 

 
 
SECTIONS 

76. Proof of documents by production of certified copies. 

77. Proof of other official documents. 

Presumptions as to documents 

78. Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies. 

79. Presumption as to documents produced as record of evidence, etc. 

80. Presumption as to Gazettes, newspapers, and other documents. 

81. Presumption as to Gazettes in electronic or digital record. 

82. Presumption as to maps or plans made by authority of Government. 

83. Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decisions. 

84. Presumption as to powers-of-attorney. 

85. Presumption as to electronic agreements. 

86. Presumption as to electronic records and electronic signatures. 

87. Presumption as to Electronic Signature Certificates. 

88. Presumption as to certified copies of foreign judicial records. 

89. Presumption as to books, maps and charts. 

90. Presumption as to electronic messages. 

91. Presumption as to due execution, etc., of documents not produced. 

92. Presumption as to documents thirty years old. 

93. Presumption as to electronic records five years old. 

CHAPTER VI 

OF THE EXCLUSION OF ORAL EVIDENCE BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 

94. Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of 

document. 

95. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement. 

96. Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous document. 

97. Exclusion of evidence against application of document to existing facts. 

98. Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts. 

99. Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of several persons. 

100. Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the 

whole correctly applies. 

101. Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc. 

102. Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document. 

103. Saving of provisions of Indian Succession Act relating to wills. 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
PART IV 

PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE 

CHAPTER VII 

OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF 

SECTIONS 

104. Burden of proof. 

105. On whom burden of proof lies. 

106. Burden of proof as to particular fact. 

107. Burden of proving fact to be proved to make evidence admissible. 

108. Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions. 

109. Burden of proving fact especially within knowledge. 

110. Burden of proving death of person known to have been alive within thirty years. 

111. Burden of proving that person is alive who has not been heard of for seven years. 

112. Burden of proof as to relationship in the cases of partners, landlord and tenant, principal and 

agent. 

113. Burden of proof as to ownership. 
114. Proof of good faith in transactions where one party is in relation of active confidence. 
115. Presumption as to certain offences. 
116. Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy. 
117. Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman. 
118. Presumption as to dowry death. 
119. Court may presume existence of certain facts. 
120. Presumption as to absence of consent in certain prosecution for rape. 

CHAPTER VIII 
ESTOPPEL 

121. Estoppel. 

122. Estoppel of tenant and of licensee of person in possession. 

123. Estoppel of acceptor of bill of exchange, bailee or licensee. 

CHAPTER IX 
OF WITNESSES 

124. Who may testify. 

125. Witness unable to communicate verbally. 

126. Competency of husband and wife as witnesses in certain cases. 

127. Judges and Magistrates. 

128. Communications during marriage. 

129. Evidence as to affairs of State. 

130. Official communications. 

131. Information as to commission of offences. 

132. Professional communications. 

5 

 
 
 
 
SECTIONS 

133. Privilege not waived by volunteering evidence. 

134. Confidential communication with legal advisers. 

135. Production of title-deeds of witness not a party.  

136. Production of documents or electronic records which another person, having possession, 

could refuse to produce. 

137. Witness not excused from answering on ground that answer will criminate. 

138. Accomplice. 

139. Number of witnesses. 

CHAPTER X 

OF EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES 

140. Order of production and examination of witnesses. 

141. Judge to decide as to admissibility of evidence. 

142. Examination of witnesses. 

143. Order of examinations. 

144. Cross examination of person called to produce a document. 

145. Witnesses to character. 

146. Leading questions. 

147. Evidence as to matters in writing. 

148. Cross examination as to previous statements in writing. 

149. Questions lawful in cross examination. 

150. When witness to be compelled to answer. 

151. Court to decide when question shall be asked and when witness compelled to answer. 

152. Question not to be asked without reasonable grounds. 

153. Procedure of Court in case of question being asked without reasonable grounds. 

154. Indecent and scandalous questions. 

155. Questions intended to insult or annoy. 

156. Exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing veracity. 

157. Question by party to his own witness. 

158. Impeaching credit of witness. 

159. Questions tending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact, admissible. 

160. Former statements of witness may be proved to corroborate later testimony as to same fact. 

161.  What  matters  may  be  proved  in  connection  with  proved  statement  relevant  under               

section 26 or 27. 

162. Refreshing memory. 

163. Testimony to facts stated in document mentioned in section 162.  

164. Right of adverse party as to writing used to refresh memory. 

165. Production of documents. 

6 

 
SECTIONS 

166. Giving, as evidence, of document called for and produced on notice. 

167. Using, as evidence, of document production of which was refused on notice. 

168. Judge's power to put questions or order production. 

CHAPTER XI 

OF IMPROPER ADMISSION AND REJECTION OF EVIDENCE 

169. No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence. 

CHAPTER XII 
REPEAL AND SAVINGS 

170. Repeal and savings. 

THE SCHEDULE 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
THE BHARATIYA SAKSHYA ADHINIYAM, 2023 

ACT 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 

1. Short title, application and commencement.–– (1) This Act may be called the Bharatiya Sakshya 

Adhiniyam, 2023.  

(2) It applies to all judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including Courts-martial, but not to 

affidavits presented to any Court or officer, nor to proceedings before an arbitrator. 

(3)  It  shall  come  into  force  on  such  date1  as  the  Central  Government  may,  by  notification  in  the 

Official Gazette, appoint. 

2. Definitions.— (1) In this Adhiniyam, unless the context otherwise requires,— 

(a)  “Court”  includes  all  Judges  and  Magistrates,  and  all  persons,  except  arbitrators,  legally 

authorised to take evidence; 

(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; 

(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; 

(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. 

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— 

1.  1st  July,  2024,  vide  notification  No.  S.O.  849(E),  dated,  23rd  day  of  February,  2024,  see  Gazette  of  India,  Extraordinary,                
Part II, sec. 3(ii). 

8 

 
                                                           
 
(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— 

(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. 

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. 

A is accused of the murder of B. At his trial, the following facts may be in issue:— 

Illustrations. 

(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; 

(i) “not proved”.—A fact is said to be not proved when it is neither proved nor disproved; 

(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; 

(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; 

(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. 

9 

 
(2)  Words  and  expressions  used  herein and  not  defined  but  defined  in the  Information Technology 

Act,  2000  (21  of  2000),  the  Bharatiya  Nagarik  Suraksha  Sanhita,  2023  and  the  Bharatiya  Nyaya               
Sanhita, 2023 shall have the same meanings as assigned to them in the said Act and Sanhitas. 

PART II 

CHAPTER II 

RELEVANCY OF FACTS 

3. Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts.— Evidence may be given in any suit 
or  proceeding  of  the  existence  or  non-existence  of  every  fact  in  issue  and  of  such  other  facts  as  are 
hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others. 

Explanation.—This  section  shall  not  enable  any  person  to  give  evidence  of  a  fact  which  he  is 

disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force relating to civil procedure. 

(a) A is tried for the murder of B by beating him with a club with the intention of causing his death. 

Illustrations. 

At A’s trial the following facts are in issue:— 

A’s beating B with the club; 

A’s causing B’s death by such beating; 

A’s intention to cause B’s death. 

(b) A suitor does not bring with him, and have in readiness for production at the first hearing of the 
case,  a  bond  on  which  he  relies.  This  section  does  not  enable  him  to  produce  the  bond  or  prove  its 
contents  at  a  subsequent  stage  of  the  proceedings,  otherwise  than  in  accordance  with  the  conditions 
prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908). 

4. Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction.—Facts which, though not in issue, are so 
connected  with  a  fact  in  issue  or  a  relevant  fact  as  to  form  part  of  the  same  transaction,  are  relevant, 
whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places. 

Closely connected facts 

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. 

5. 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. 

10 

 
 
 
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. 

6.  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. 

11 

 
(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. 

7.  Facts  necessary  to  explain  or  introduce  fact  in  issue  or  relevant  facts.—Facts  necessary  to 
explain or introduce a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which support or rebut an inference suggested by a 
fact in issue or a relevant fact, or which establish the identity of anything, or person whose identity, is 
relevant, or fix the time or place at which any fact in issue or relevant fact happened, or which show the 
relation of parties by whom any such fact was transacted, are relevant in so far as they are necessary for 
that purpose. 

Illustrations. 

(a) The question is, whether a given document is the will of A. The state of A's property and of his 

family at the date of the alleged will may be relevant facts. 

(b) A sues B for a libel imputing disgraceful conduct to A; B affirms that the  matter alleged to be 
libellous is true. The position and relations of the parties at the time when the libel was published may be 
relevant facts as introductory to the facts in issue. The particulars of a dispute between A and B about a 
matter unconnected with the alleged libel are irrelevant, though the fact that there was a dispute may be 
relevant if it affected the relations between A and B. 

(c) A is accused of a crime. The fact that, soon after the commission of the crime, A absconded from 
his house, is relevant under section 6, as conduct subsequent to and affected by facts in issue. The fact 
that, at the time when he left home, A had sudden and urgent business at the place to which he went, is 
relevant, as tending to explain the fact that he left home suddenly. The details of the business on which he 
left  are  not  relevant,  except  in  so  far  as  they  are  necessary  to  show  that  the  business  was  sudden  and 
urgent. 

(d) A sues B for inducing C to break a contract of service made by him with A. C, on leaving A's 
service, says to A—“I am leaving you because B has made me a better offer”. This statement is a relevant 
fact as explanatory of C's conduct, which is relevant as a fact in issue. 

(e) A, accused of theft, is seen to give the stolen property to B, who is seen to give it to A's wife. B 
says as he delivers it—“A says you are to hide this”. B's statement is relevant as explanatory of a fact 
which is part of the transaction. 

(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. 

8.  Things  said  or  done  by  conspirator  in  reference  to  common  design.—Where  there  is 
reasonable ground to believe that two or more persons have conspired together to commit an offence or 
an  actionable  wrong,  anything  said,  done  or  written  by  any  one  of  such  persons  in  reference  to  their 
common  intention,  after  the  time  when  such  intention  was  first  entertained  by  any  one  of  them,  is  a 
relevant  fact  as  against  each  of  the  persons  believed  to  be  so  conspiring,  as  well  for  the  purpose  of 
proving the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose of showing that any such person was a party to 
it. 

12 

 
 
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. 

9.  When  facts  not  otherwise  relevant  become  relevant.—Facts  not  otherwise  relevant  are 

relevant— 

(1) if they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact; 

(2) if by themselves or in connection with other facts they make the existence or non-existence of 

any fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or improbable. 

Illustrations. 

(a) The question is, whether A committed a crime at Chennai on a certain day. The fact that, on that 
day, A was at Ladakh is relevant. The fact that, near the time when the crime was committed, A was at a 
distance from  the  place  where  it  was  committed,  which  would  render it  highly improbable, though  not 
impossible, that he committed it, is relevant. 

(b) The question is, whether A committed a crime. The circumstances are such that the crime must 
have  been  committed  either  by  A,  B,  C  or  D.  Every  fact  which  shows  that  the  crime  could  have  been 
committed by no one else, and that it was not committed by either B, C or D, is relevant. 

10. Facts tending to enable Court to determine amount are relevant in suits for damages.—In 
suits  in  which  damages  are  claimed,  any  fact  which  will  enable  the  Court  to  determine  the  amount  of 
damages which ought to be awarded, is relevant. 

11. Facts relevant when right or custom is in question.—Where the question is as to the existence 

of any right or custom, the following facts are relevant— 

(a)  any  transaction  by  which  the  right  or  custom  in  question  was  created,  claimed,  modified, 

recognised, asserted or denied, or which was inconsistent with its existence; 

(b) particular instances in which the right or custom was claimed, recognised or exercised, or in 

which its exercise was disputed, asserted or departed from. 

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. 

12. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body or bodily feeling.—Facts showing the 
existence of any state of mind, such as intention, knowledge, good faith, negligence, rashness, ill-will or 
goodwill towards any particular person, or showing the existence of any state of body or bodily feeling, 
are relevant, when the existence of any such state of mind or body or bodily feeling is in issue or relevant. 

Explanation 1.—A fact relevant as showing the existence of a relevant state of mind must show that 

the state of mind exists, not generally, but in reference to the particular matter in question. 

Explanation  2.—But  where,  upon  the  trial  of  a  person  accused  of  an  offence,  the  previous 
commission  by  the  accused  of  an  offence  is  relevant  within  the  meaning  of  this  section,  the  previous 
conviction of such person shall also be a relevant fact. 

13 

 
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. 

14 

 
 
(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. 

13.  Facts  bearing  on  question  whether  act  was  accidental  or  intentional.—When  there  is  a 
question whether an act was accidental or intentional, or done with a particular knowledge or intention, 
the fact that such act formed part of a series of similar occurrences, in each of which the person doing the 
act was concerned, is relevant. 

Illustrations. 

(a) A is accused of burning down his house in order to obtain money for which it is insured. The facts 
that A lived in several houses successively each of which he insured, in each of which a fire occurred, 
and after each of which fires A received payment from a different insurance company, are relevant, as 
tending to show that the fires were not accidental. 

(b) A is employed to receive money from the debtors of B. It is A's duty to make entries in a book 
showing  the  amounts  received  by  him.  He  makes  an  entry  showing  that  on  a  particular  occasion  he 
received  less  than  he  really  did  receive.  The  question  is,  whether  this  false  entry  was  accidental  or 
intentional. The facts that other entries made by A in the same book are false, and that the false entry is in 
each case in favour of A, are relevant. 

(c) A is accused of fraudulently delivering to B a counterfeit currency. The question is, whether the 
delivery  of  the  currency  was  accidental.  The  facts  that,  soon  before  or  soon  after  the  delivery  to  B,  A 
delivered  counterfeit  currency  to  C,  D  and  E  are  relevant,  as  showing  that  the  delivery  to  B  was  not 
accidental. 

14. Existence of course of business when relevant.—When there is a question whether a particular 
act was done, the existence of any course of business, according to which it naturally would have been 
done, is a relevant fact. 

Illustrations. 

(a)  The  question  is,  whether  a  particular  letter  was  dispatched.  The  facts  that  it  was  the  ordinary 
course of business for all letters put in a certain place to be carried to the post, and that particular letter 
was put in that place are relevant. 

(b) The question is, whether a particular letter reached A. The facts that it was posted in due course, 

and was not returned through the Return Letter Office, are relevant. 

Admissions 

15.  Admission  defined.—An  admission  is  a  statement,  oral  or  documentary  or  contained  in 
electronic form, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made 
by any of the persons, and under the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned. 

16.  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 

15 

 
(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. 

17. Admissions by persons whose position must be proved as against party to suit.—Statements 
made by persons whose position or liability, it is necessary to prove as against any party to the suit, are 
admissions, if such statements  would be relevant as against such persons in relation to such position or 
liability  in  a  suit  brought  by  or  against  them,  and  if  they  are  made  whilst  the  person  making  them 
occupies such position or is subject to such liability. 

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. 

18. Admissions by persons expressly referred to by party to suit.—Statements made by persons to 
whom  a  party  to  the  suit  has  expressly  referred  for  information  in  reference  to  a  matter  in  dispute  are 
admissions. 

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. 

Illustration. 

19. Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf.—Admissions 
are relevant and may be proved as against the person who makes them, or his representative in interest; 
but  they  cannot  be  proved  by  or  on  behalf  of  the  person  who  makes  them  or  by  his  representative  in 
interest, except in the following cases, namely:— 

(1)  an  admission  may  be  proved  by  or  on  behalf  of  the  person  making  it,  when  it is  of  such  a 
nature that, if the person making it were dead, it would be relevant as between third 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. 

16 

 
(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. 

20. When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant.—Oral admissions as to the 
contents of a document are not relevant, unless and until the party proposing to prove them shows that he 
is  entitled  to  give  secondary  evidence  of  the  contents  of  such  document  under  the  rules  hereinafter 
contained, or unless the genuineness of a document produced is in question. 

21. Admissions in civil cases when relevant.—In civil cases no admission is relevant, if it is made 
either upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be given, or under circumstances from which 
the Court can infer that the parties agreed together that evidence 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. 

22. Confession caused by inducement, threat, coercion or promise, when irrelevant in criminal 
proceeding.—A  confession  made  by  an  accused  person  is  irrelevant  in  a  criminal  proceeding,  if  the 
making of the confession appears to the Court to have been caused by any inducement, threat, coercion or 
promise having reference to the charge against the accused person, proceeding from a person in authority 
and sufficient, in the opinion of the Court, to give the accused person grounds which would appear to him 
reasonable for supposing that by making it he would gain any advantage or avoid any evil of a temporal 
nature in reference to the proceedings against him: 

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. 

23.  Confession  to  police  officer.—(1)  No  confession  made  to  a  police  officer  shall  be  proved  as 

against a person accused of any offence. 

(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: 

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. 

24. Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial 
for  same  offence.—When  more  persons  than  one  are  being  tried  jointly  for  the  same  offence,  and  a 
confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of such persons is proved, the 
Court  may  take  into  consideration  such  confession  as  against  such  other  person  as  well  as  against  the 
person who makes such confession. 

Explanation I.—“Offence”, as used in this section, includes the abetment of, or attempt to commit, 

the offence. 

17 

 
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. 

25. Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop.—Admissions are not conclusive proof of the 

matters admitted but they may operate as estoppels under the provisions hereinafter contained. 

Statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses 

26. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is 
relevant.—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. 

18 

 
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. 

27. 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. 

19 

 
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. 

Statements made under special circumstances 

28. 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. 

29. 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. 

30. 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. 

31.  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. 

32. 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. 

How much of a statement is to be proved 

33.  What  evidence  to  be  given  when  statement  forms  part  of  a  conversation,  document, 
electronic record, book or series of letters or papers.—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. 

Judgments of Courts when relevant 

34. 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 

20 

 
relevant fact when the question is whether such Court ought to take cognizance of such suit or to hold 
such trial. 

35. 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. 

36.  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. 

37.  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. 

21 

 
38. 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. 

Opinions of third persons when relevant 

39. 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.  

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           
(21 of 2000), is a relevant fact. 

Explanation.—For the purposes of this sub-section, an Examiner of Electronic Evidence shall be an 

expert. 

40.  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. 

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. 

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. 

22 

 
 
 
 
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. 

42. 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. 

43. 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. 

44.  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  (4  of  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. 

45.  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. 

Character when relevant 

46. 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. 

23 

 
47. In criminal cases previous good character relevant.—In criminal proceedings the fact that the 

person accused is of a good character, is relevant. 

48.  Evidence  of  character  or  previous  sexual  experience  not  relevant  in  certain  cases.—In  a 

for  an  offence  under section  64, section  65, section  66, section  67, section  68,                         

prosecution 
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. 

49. 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. 

50. 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 

51. Fact judicially noticeable need not be proved.—No fact of which the Court will take judicial 

notice need be proved. 

52. 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; 

24 

 
(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. 

53. 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. 

CHAPTER IV 

OF ORAL EVIDENCE 

54. Proof of facts by oral evidence.—All facts, except the contents of documents may be proved by 

oral evidence. 

55.  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. 

CHAPTER V 

OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 

56. Proof of contents of documents.—The contents of documents may be proved either by primary 

or by secondary evidence. 

57. Primary evidence.—Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of 

the Court. 

25 

 
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. 

58. 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. 

26 

 
59.  Proof  of  documents  by  primary  evidence.— Documents  shall  be  proved  by  primary 

evidence except in the cases hereinafter mentioned. 

60. 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. 

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. 

62.  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. 

63.  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. 

27 

 
(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,— 

28 

 
(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). 

64. 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. 

65. 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. 

66.  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. 

67. 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 (16 of 1908), unless its execution by the person by whom it purports to have been 
executed is specifically denied. 

68. 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. 

69.  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. 

70.  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. 

29 

 
71. 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. 

72.  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. 

73. 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. 

74. Public and private documents.—(1) The following documents are public documents:— 

Public documents 

(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. 

75.  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. 

76. 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. 

77.  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 

30 

 
(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. 

Presumptions as to documents 

78. 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. 

79. 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. 

80. 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. 

31 

 
81.  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. 

82.  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. 

83. 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. 

84.  Presumption  as  to  powers-of-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. 

85.  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. 

86.  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. 

87.  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. 

88. 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 (10 of 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. 

89. 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 

32 

 
published by the person, and at the time and place, by whom or at which it purports to have been written 
or published. 

90. 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. 

91. 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. 

92. 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. 

93. 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. 

CHAPTER VI 
OF THE EXCLUSION OF ORAL EVIDENCE BY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 

94. Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of 
document.—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. 

33 

 
 
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. 

95. 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. 

34 

 
(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. 

96.  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. 

97.  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. 

98. 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. 

99.  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. 

35 

 
 
Illustrations. 

(a)  A  agrees  to  sell  to  B,  for  one  thousand  rupees,  “my  white  horse”.  A  has  two  white  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. 

100. 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. 

101.  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. 

102.  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. 

103.  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 (39 of 1925) as to the 
construction of wills. 

PART IV 
PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE 
CHAPTER VII 

OF THE BURDEN OF PROOF 

104. 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. 

105.  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. 

36 

 
 
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. 

106. 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. 

Illustration. 

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. 

107. 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. 

108. 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. 

109. 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. 

110. 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. 

37 

 
111. 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. 

112. 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. 

113.  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. 

114. 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. 

Illustrations. 

(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. 

115. 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. 

116. 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. 

117. 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 

38 

 
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. 

118. 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. 

119. 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. 

The Court may presume that— 

Illustrations. 

(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; 

39 

 
(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. 

120. 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. 

CHAPTER VIII 

ESTOPPEL 

121.  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. 

122.  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. 

123.  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. 

40 

 
CHAPTER IX 

OF WITNESSES 

124.  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. 

125.  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. 

126. 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. 

127. 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. 

128.  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. 

129. 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. 

130. 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. 

131.  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. 

41 

 
 
Explanation.—“revenue officer” means any officer employed in or about the business of any branch 

of the public revenue. 

132. Professional communications.—(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: 

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. 

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. 

133. 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. 

134. 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. 

135. 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. 

136. 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 

42 

 
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. 

137.  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. 

138.  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. 

139. Number of witnesses.—No particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required for the 

proof of any fact. 

CHAPTER X 

OF EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES 

140.  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. 

141.  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. 

142. 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. 

43 

 
(3) The examination of a witness, subsequent to the cross-examination, by the party who called him, 

shall be called his re-examination. 

143.  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. 

144.  Cross-examination  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. 

145. Witnesses to character.—Witnesses to character may be cross-examined and re-examined. 

146.  Leading  questions.—(1)  Any  question  suggesting  the  answer  which  the  person  putting  it 

wishes or expects to receive, is called a leading question. 

(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. 

(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. 

(4) Leading questions may be asked in cross-examination. 

147.  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. 

148. 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. 

149.  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: 

44 

 
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. 

150. 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. 

151.  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. 

152. 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. 

153.  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. 

154.  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 

45 

 
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. 

155.  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. 

156. 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. 

157.  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. 

158. 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. 

46 

 
(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. 

159.  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. 

160. 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. 

161. 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. 

162. 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. 

163. 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. 

164. 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. 

47 

 
165. 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. 

166. 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. 

167.  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. 

168.  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. 

CHAPTER XI 

OF IMPROPER ADMISSION AND REJECTION OF EVIDENCE 

169.  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. 

48 

 
 
 
 
CHAPTER XII 

REPEAL AND SAVINGS 

170. Repeal and savings.—(1) The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 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 (1 of 1872), as in force immediately before such commencement, as if this 
Adhiniyam had not come into force. 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
THE SCHEDULE 

[See section 63(4)(c)] 

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 □      DVR □       Mobile □       Flash Drive □ 
CD/DVD □         Server □       Cloud □        Other □ 

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 □  

Maintained □  

Managed □  

 Operated□ 

by me (select as applicable). 

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) 

Date (DD/MM/YYYY): _____ 

Time (IST): ________hours (In 24 hours format) 

Place: ____________ 

50 

(Name and signature) 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
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):— 

Mobile □ 
Computer / Storage Media □     DVR □  
CD/DVD □  Server □ 
Other □ 
 Cloud □ 
Other: ________________________________________ 

Flash Drive □ 

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) 

Date (DD/MM/YYYY): _____ 

Time (IST): ________hours (In 24 hours format) 

 Place: ____________ 

(Name, designation and signature)