INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872

PART 1
CHAPTER 1
EXTENT: The Indian Evidence Act1 in its Section 1 lays down the extent of application of
the Act.
Original Position:
The Act originally applied to the whole of India except the State of Jammu And Kashmir.
Current Position:
The Act now extends even to the state of Jammu and Kashmir with the passage of the Jammu
Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019.
The Act is applicable on all proceedings taking place in all courts and court-martials
throughout the nation- except those constituted under the Army, Naval or Air Force Act
Applicability of the Act
 Even though, the Act does not apply to Arbitration proceedings, the standards of
natural justice may be followed by the arbitrators in collection of evidence expedient
to their proceedings.2
 The Act is not applicable on Income Tax Inquiries.3
 The Act is applicable to the proceedings conducted by a Commission appointed under
the CPC.
 The Act does not apply to Domestic4 or Departmental5 inquiries or proceedings.

INTERPRETATION CLAUSES:
Section 3 of the Act lays down the definitions and explanations of important terms used in the
Act. This is to allow for a comprehensive understanding of the Act.
Court
 Courts mean all persons except arbitrators authorised to collect evidence.
 In the case of Munna Lal v. State of U.P.6, it was held by the Court that Family Courts
fall within the definition of a court under the Act.
 The case of Bhimrajee v. Union7 held that Domestic Tribunals do not fall under courts
and thus do not invoke the application of the Act.

1
Hereinafter called The Act.
2
Haralal v. State Industrial Court A 1967 B 174.
3
Basanta Chandra Ghosh in the matter of, AIR 1960 Pat 430.
4
State of Haryana v. Rattan Singh, AIR 1977 SC 1512.
5
K.L. Shinda v. State of Mysore, AIR 1976 SC 1080.
6
Munna Lal v. State of U.P., AIR 1991 All 189.
7
Bhimrajee v. Union AIR 1971 Cal 336.
  A Magistrate committing a case to the Sessions Court falls under the definition of
Court.8 But a Magistrate holding preliminary enquiry under Section 164 of CPC does
not constitute ‘court’.9
Facts
 May be external or internal.
 External facts refer to those in relation to things, a state of things or relation of things
perceivable by the senses.
 Internal Facts refer to mental condition that a person is conscious of. It includes the
act of seeing, hearing or uttering something. It also refers to an opinion or intention a
person might have regarding a particular thing or event at a particular time.

Question. Can a future event be a fact?

Answer: No. The case of Dueful Lab v. State clarified the law stating that any
contingent event that may or may not happen in the future cannot be termed as a
fact.

Facts can be broadly categorised into Facts in Issue and Relevant Facts
Relevant Fact: One fact is said to be relevant to another when the one is connected with the
other in any of the ways referred to in the provisions of this Act relating to the relevancy of
facts.
Facts in Issue: The expression "facts in issue" means and includes--any fact from which,
either by itself or in connection with other facts, the existence, nonexistence, nature or extent
of any right, liability, or disability asserted or denied in any suit or proceeding, necessarily
follows. The question as to what constitutes “Facts in Issue” must be determined by
substantive law or that branch of procedural law that deals with pleadings.
Evidence
Evidence is a matter of fact which possess the capability to persuade another of the existence
or non-existence of another matter of fact. Evidence may be oral which refers to the
testimony of witnesses, or documentary, which refers to documents and electronic records
tendered before the Court.
The guilt of an accused may be proved using circumstantial evidence as well.10

Question: What does circumstantial evidence mean?

Answer: Circumstantial evidence refers to drawing inferences from relevant facts
closely associated with the facts in issue to prove the guilt or innocence of a person.
However, the standard of proof required for circumstantial evidence is quite high and
great caution must be taken for the same
8
Atchayya v. Gangayya, 1891 15 Mad 138 FB.
9
Queen-Empress v. Bharma (1886) 11 Bom 702 FB.
10
Vilas Pandurang Patil v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2004 SC 3562.
 CHAPTER 2 (Section 5-55)
RELEVANCY OF FACTS
A Relevant fact may be a logically relevant fact or a legally relevant fact. When one fact
bears a causal relation to another so as to tender to its existence or non-existence it becomes a
logically relevant fact.
In some situations, the law recognises causal bearings facts may have with one another and
that becomes a legally relevant fact.
For ex: In a case where A is accused of murdering B in a park, the fact that C saw A keeping
a knife in the park is logically relevant. However, legally it may not be enough to establish
guilt since it only proves that he kept a knife in the park.
Section 5 of the Act makes it clear that the evidence produced must be in relation to only the
relevant facts of the case.
Which facts and circumstances may be called relevant facts and the conditions in which an
irrelevant fact may become a relevant one are discussed from Section 6 to 55.
WHICH FACTS ARE RELEVANT?
 Facts which are connected to facts in issue in such a manner so as to make them part
of the same transaction become relevant even when they are not facts in issue- Sec. 6
 Facts which have a direct effect on the occurrence or cause of an event or are helpful
in determining the state or opportunity under which something may or may not
happened. – Sec. 7
 Facts which show motive, intent or preparation for an event are relevant. Facts which
prove the previous or subsequent conduct of a party or an agent of a party who is
related to the suit are relevant - Sec. 8
 Facts which are imperative to introduce, support, rebut or explain relevant facts are
relevant. Facts which describe the identity of a person whose identity is crucial to the
case or facts which establish a relationship between individuals where a fact in issue
depends upon such relation are relevant- Sec. 9
 Facts which prove the existence of a conspiracy are relevant. They may include a
communication or a statement from one of the conspirators in reference to a common
design. Such a reference must be necessarily made after the common design has been
formulated- Sec. 10
 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- Sec. 12
 Facts that show the state of mind- intent, knowledge, ill-will, negligence towards a
particular person or event at a time which is relevant to the issue in hand is relevant if
such state of mind is imperative for a fact in issue- Sec.14
 Facts ascertaining that a particular act by a person is unprecedented or not is a
relevant fact in determining whether a person may or may not have committed the
same act in the case in question- Sec. 15
  Facts which explain what happens in the normal course of life become relevant when
they help in determining whether a particular event did or did not occur. For ex: If the
question is whether a letter was dispatched or not, the fact that The fact 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.

WHEN FACTS NOT OTHERWISE RELEVANT BECOME RELEVANT- Sec. 11

 When a fact disproves another relevant fact, it becomes relevant.

 If a fact in its independent application or in relation with another fact, castes a doubt
upon the existence or occurrence of a fact in issue, the fact becomes relevant.

Question: What is the difference between relevance and admissibility of a fact?

Answer: The difference between the two were cleared out in the case of Dato Seri
Anwar bin Ibrahim v. Public Prosecutor. It stated that: Relevancy is a question
pertaining to the tendering of evidence before a court of law and is for the lawyers to
decide. On the other hand, admissibility is for the judge to decide since it pertains to the
weight that must be attached to a piece of evidence tendered before the court.

ADMISSIONS (Section 17- 31)

Admission is a confession or voluntary acknowledgement of a party or any person identified

with them to that of the existence of certain facts in legal interest, the predominant
characteristics of such types of evidence is of its binding nature.

There are two types of admissions:

 Judicial admissions
 Extra-judicial admissions

Judicial admissions are formal and made during the proceeding of the case. Whereas, extra-
judicial admissions are informal and do not appear on record. Judicial admissions are fully
binding on the party who made them and they constitute a waiver of proof. Its reference can
be taken from Sec. 58 of the Act.

SECTION 18:
Lays down five classes of persons who can make admissions:
1. Party to the proceeding
2. Agent authorised by such party
 3. Party suing or being sued in a representative character (Statement made while holding
such character)
4. Person who has any proprietary or pecuniary interest in the subject-matter of the
proceeding, during the continuance of such interest
5. Person from whom the parties to the suit have derived their interest in the subject-
matter of the suit, during the continuance of such an interest.11

SECTION 19:
Section 19 deals with admissions by persons whose positions must be proved as against party
to suit. The object of this section is not to lay down that certain statement are relevant or
admissible, but merely to add a category of people by whom a statement may be made before
it can be considered to be an admission in terms of the Act. The statements referred to in
Section 19 become admissible provided they satisfy the requirements of Sec. 17 as regards
their nature and Sec. 21 or any of the following sections as regards their liability.12

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

Sec. 20 of the Act states that “Statements made by person to whom a party to the suit has
expressly referred for information in reference to matter in dispute are admissions.
This is an exception to the general rule that admissions by third party are not relevant to the
suit. The reason for this exception was explained in the case of Hirachand Kothari v. State
of Rajasthan13. The court reasoned that when a party refers to another person for a statement
of his views, the party approves of his utterance in anticipation and adopts it as his own. The
reference may be by express word or by conduct, but in any case, there must be a clear
admission to refer and such admissions are generally conclusive.

FACT: It was held in the case of Tumman v. Sheo Darshan that a party can abandon
the agreement before the referee can make a statement.

SECTION 21
Sec. 21 of the Act states that : “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:--
(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 32.

11
Ratanlal and Dhirajlal The Law of Evidence p. 478 ed. 24.
12
Appavu v. Nanjappa, ILR 25 Mad LJ 329.
13
Hirachand Kothari v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1985 SC 998.
(2) An admission may by 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 on behalf of the person making it, if it is relevant
otherwise than as an admission.”

The general rule laid down in Section 21 is that admissions are relevant and may be proved
against person who makes them or by his representative-in- interest. It is quite natural that a
person always makes statement in his favour even if the statement is false. The other
proposition is that the statements will be used against the person who himself cannot prove
his own statements. If persons are allowed to prove their statements, they will make the
statement in their favour, such type of self-serving statement by party is irrelevant and cannot
be regarded as evidence. The reason is that a man might bring evidence to prove the
statement made by himself and take advantage from it. The simple meaning is this that the
statement of admission must be proved by third person other than the maker of the statement.
An admission of the party privy to the suit is relevant under section 21. Even though
admissions are substantive evidence, their weight is a matter of consideration of the Court.
A self-serving statement by a party is irrelevant unless it comes within the exceptions in
Section 21 of the Act. The exceptions are laid down as under:

(1) When the statement is such of a nature that it should have been relevant as dying
declaration under section 32;

(2) When it consists of a statement of the existence of bodily feeling or state of mind falling
under section 14.

(3) When the statement otherwise relevant falling under section 21(3).

SECTION 22
Sec. 22 of the Act says oral admissions regarding the contents of a document are not relevant
unless the person proposing to give such admission is entitled to provide a secondary opinion
or unless the veracity and authenticity of the document itself is in question
22A- Sec. 22A of the Act simply states that: “Oral admissions as to the contents of electronic
records are not relevant, unless the genuineness of the electronic record produced is in
question.”

This section was added to the Evidence Act by the Information Technology Act, 2000

SECTION 23
This section excludes admissions in civil cases under two scenarios:
 Admissions which are made upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to
given
 Under circumstances from which the court can infer that the parties agreed together
that evidence of it should not be given.
However, the explanation to this section says that admissions by barrister, pleader, attorney
or vakil are not excluded by this section.

It was observed in the case of Hoghton v. Hoghton that this section was made to
protect communications which are made without prejudice. Confidential overtures of
pacification and other offers or propositions between litigating parties, expressly or
impliedly made without prejudice are excluded on grounds of public policy.

CONFESSIONS
Confessions are received on the same principles as admissions i.e. a person will not make an
untrue statement against his own interest. A confession is admissible only against the person
who has made it, unless the same is rendered inadmissible under some express provision.14

“Deliberate and voluntary confessions of guilt if clearly proved, are among the most
effectual proofs in law.”
-Emperor v. Narayen

SECTION 24
This section lists out 3 conditions when the confession of a person shall not be considered
relevant:
 Under inducement
 By threat
 By promise
When these are:
 In reference to the charge against the accused person
 Proceeding from a person in authority
 Sufficient, in the opinion of the court, to give the accused grounds to understand that
such a confession would give him some gain or help avoid some evil.

14
State of Maharashtra v. Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil, (2013) 12 SCC 17.
The object of this section is to safeguard the rights of the accused so that he is not coerced
into giving testimony against himself.

“A confession must be the outcome of the accused’s own free will inspired by the sound
of his own conscience to speak noting but the truth.”
- Mohd. Khalid v. State of W.B.

SECTION 28
This section states that if the impression of inducement, threat or promise is, in the opinion of
the court, removed then such a confession would become relevant.
The appropriate placement of this section would have been immediately after Section 24 in
the Act.

Question: How do Courts decide that inducement has ceased?

Answer: In determining whether the inducement has ceased or not, the nature of such
inducement, circumstances in which it was made, its effects on the person induced and
the person’s position shall all be considered. This was held in the case of Shobha
Param v. State of M.P.

SECTION 25
This section states that a confession made in front of a police officer would not be admissible.
This is because the fear of the accused could coerce him into giving self-incriminating
evidence making the confession untrustworthy.

SECTION 26
While the previous section makes admissions in front of the police inadmissible, this section
makes evidence given in front of anyone inadmissible till the time there is a scope to be
influenced by the police. This section is based on the premise that a confession in front of the
Magistrate would not be influenced by the police and would be voluntary.15

SECTION 27

15
Hiran Maya, in the matter of (1877) 1 CLR 21.
 This section states that any confession made in front of a police officer would become
admissible if facts and evidence collected in course of investigation corroborates with the
facts confessed to. The rationale behind excluding confessions to the police is that there is a
possibility of coercion and inducement. However, if evidence collected bolsters such a
confession then it would be counter-productive to disbelief the confession.

SECTION 29
Under this section, all confessions made under the following circumstances would be
relevant:
1. Under a promise of secrecy:
A confession of a person’s crime to another under an oath of secrecy, does not
become an inadmissible by virtue of the promise it was given under. The inducement
to confess would not be of the nature so as to make the confession inadmissible.16
2. Statements made under deception:
A confession does not become inadmissible for the sole reason that the person
confessing was deceived and not under the impression that he was confessing.
3. Statements overheard:
A confession soliloquy, heard by others, will not be inadmissible but it can only be
used for the purpose of corroboration.17
4. Statements made when intoxicated
5. Statements made without having been warned

SECTION 30.
This section states that when more than one person is being tried for the same offence, one
person’s admission of guilt regarding his involvement as well as the involvement of the
second accused would be admissible in court if it can be sufficiently proved. The confession,
to the extent of the other accused’s involvement, would not become irrelevant for the reason
that it was not given by him.
For Example:
(a) A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. It is proved that A said--"B and I murdered
C". The Court may consider the effect of this confession as against B.
(b) A is on his trial for the murder of C. There is evidence to show that C was murdered by A
and B, and that B said--"A and I murdered C ". This statement may not be taken into
consideration by the Court against A, as B is not being jointly tried.
SECTION 31
This section plainly states that “Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted
but they may operate as estoppels under the provisions contained hereinafter.”

16
Rex v. Shaw, (1834) 6 C&P 372.
17
Sahoo v. State of U.P., AIR 1966 SC 40.
SECTION 32
Section 32 is an exception to a general rule that hearsay evidence is inadmissible. Under this
section, indirect evidence is considered relevant as was held in the case of Mst. Biro v. Atma
Ram18
This section deals primarily with statements from people who are unable or have become
incapable to give evidence or whose attendance cannot be feasibly or timely procured. Their
statements are relevant subject to the following conditions
1. When it relates to cause of death:
Statements made by a person before his death which are in relation to
- Circumstances relating to his death
- Cause of death
Are relevant irrespective of whether or not the person making such a statement at the
time apprehended his death.
2. In the ordinary course of business:
The statements made in the ordinary course of business are relevant if they relate to:
- Entry or memorandum made by him in the books
- Discharge of professional duty
- Acknowledgement (signed or written) of receipt of money, goods, securities or
property
- Document (written or signed) used in commerce
- Date of a letter or other document usually dated, signed or written by him.
3. Against interest of maker:
When the statements are against the pecuniary or proprietary interest of the person
making the statement thereby incriminating him to a suit for damages or criminal
proceedings.
4. Gives opinion as to public right or custom or matters of general interests:
Such statements are only relevant if the person making such a statement made it
before a controversy regarding the same arose.
5. Relates to existence of a relation:
Statements regarding the relationship between two parties would be relevant if:
- the existence of such a relationship was in question
- the person making the said statement had special knowledge about the
relationship in question
- and that the statement was made before any controversy regarding the same
arose.
6. Made in will or deed relating to family affairs:
When the statement made is related to the existence of a relationship by blood,
adoption or marriage between the deceased persons in any deed or will and such will
or deed is related to the family affairs of such deceased person then it is considered to
be relevant. Such a statement is required to be made before the question in dispute
was raised.
7. Document relating to transaction mentioned in section 13, clause (a):

18
 When the statement is contained in any deed, will or other document which relates to
any such transaction as is mentioned in section 13, clause (a).
8. Made by several persons and expresses feelings relevant to matter in question:
When the statement was made by a number of persons, and expressed feelings or
impressions on their pan relevant to the matter in question.

Who can make these statements?

- The person who is dead
- The person who cannot be found
- Person incapable of giving evidence

SECTION 34 TO 38: STATEMENTS MADE UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES

Sec. 34 of the Act states that “Entries in books of accounts including those maintained in an
electronic form is relevant when it is regularly kept in the course of business.”

Book of accounts means a book in which businessman, traders or merchants

generally maintained their accounts. In

this section, there are two general classes of statements which have been dealt under this:
1. Entries in books of accounts regularly kept in the course of business
2. Entries in public documents or in a document of a public character.
Both the classes of statements are relevant and admissible. It doesn’t matter whether the
person who made them is called a witness or not whether the person is a party to the suit or
not.
Section 35 of the Act talks about the Entries in public record and official book. An entry in
- 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 enjoyed by the law
of the country in which such book, register, or record or an electronic record is
kept
is itself a relevant fact.
A document becomes admissible only if it complies with the following conditions:
1. An entry must be kept in public or official record
2. Entry must be prepared by a public servant
3. Entry must be prepared by a public servant in his official capacity
4. Entry must be in relation to a fact in issue or a relevant fact
Section 36 of the Act talks about Statements in maps and charts. The section includes two
types of maps and charts:
1. The printed maps or carts usually accessible for public sale
2. The maps and plans which are made under the power of government.
The first category of maps and charts are only relevant if they are for a public purpose
otherwise their accurateness may be confronted. The second kind of maps and charts are
presumed to be relevant because it is made under the authority of Government.
Section 37 talks about Statements in acts of the Parliament of India. Statements relating to
any facts of public nature contained in any acts passed by the Central or state Government
constitutes relevant facts.
Section 38 states that 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 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 purporting to be a report of such
rulings, is relevant.

SECTION 40 TO 44: WHEN ARE JUDGEMENTS OF COURTS RELEVANT

SECTION 40:
This section incorporates the principle of Res Judicata into the law. It says that when a matter
has already been decided in court, the plaintiff cannot trouble the defendant again with the
same cause of action. The earlier judgement pronounced in this respect would be an absolute
bar to initiating proceedings and would thus constitute as a relevant fact.

Question: In what cases does this section not hold true?

Answer: The principles of estoppel or res judicata do not apply when they
contravene some statutory direction or prohibition. This is something which
cannot be overridden or defeated by a previous judgement between the parties.
The same was held in the case of P.G. Eshwarappa v. M. Rudrappa.

SECTION 41:
According to this section, a judgement in rem dealing with the status or legal character of a
person can be pronounced only by the courts exercising the following kinds of jurisdiction:
- Probate jurisdiction
- Matrimonial jurisdiction
- Admiralty jurisdiction
- Insolvency Jurisdiction
For a judgement to be binding and relevant under section 41 it must necessarily follow the
conditions laid as under:
- Judgement must be a final judgement
- The court delivering the judgement must be competent.
- The judgement must have been delivered by the court in the exercise of Probate,
Matrimonial, Admiralty or Insolvency jurisdiction.
- The judgement must confer on or take away from any person any legal character or
declare that any person is entitled to such legal character or declared that any person is
entitled to any specific thing absolutely.

Question: What are Judgements in rem? How are the different from judgements in
personem?
Judgements in rem refer to those judgements which are binding not only to the parties to
the dispute but to all people falling under the jurisdiction of the Court passing such
judgement. Judgements which lay down a law or clarify a certain aspect of law are
judgements in rem. On the contrary, judgements in personem are binding only on the
parties to the dispute. They are all the ordinary judgements not affecting the status of
any subject matter, any person or anything. In such judgements, the rights of the parties
to the suit or proceedings are determined.

SECTION 42
This section talks about judgements which deal with any public issue or policy. Such
judgements are relevant in cases where the same issue comes into question. Judgements
pronouncing the law on a particular issue is, however, not conclusive proof if similar issue
comes up in another case. The court may rely on such a judgement, affirm it or reject it as a
bad law.

SECTION 43
This section states that judgements other than those covered in Sec. 41 and 42 are relevant if
the existence of such judgement, decree or order itself is in question as a fact in issue or is
relevant under any other provisions of the Act.
SECTION 44
The existence of a judgement on a particular matter is sufficient evidence itself, however
nothing is mentioned of its evidentiary value. The party to a suit may diminish the evidentiary
value of such a judgement, decree or order if he can establish that:
- The court passing the judgement was not competent to do so
- Judgement was obtained by collusion
- Judgement was obtained by fraud

SECTION 45 to 51- OPINIONS OF THIRD PERSON WHEN RELEVANT

As a general rule, the opinion of third parties is irrelevant to the law of evidence. This stance
derives its basis from the Latin maxim res inter alios acta meaning that the act between two
people does not harm or benefit another. However, Section 45-51 deal with special
circumstances where the opinions of third parties are taken into account and become relevant
facts.

SECTION 45
Sec. 45 lays down the 5 primary circumstances where the opinion of a third party or an
“expert” becomes relevant. They are:
1. Matters relating to foreign law
2. Matters relating to Science and technology
3. In the field of Art where expert opinions of historians or anthropologists is
considered.
4. In cases of forgery a Handwriting expert may be called.
5. Finger impressions
The opinion of experts in their respective fields is considered valid and relevant. However,
such opinion is not conclusive proof. It may be used by the court to build an opinion of its
own.

Question: What happens if the eye-witness testimony is inconsistent with the expert
opinion?
Answer: Generally, the eye-witness’s testimony is given primacy over an expert
opinion. However, if the eye- witness’s account is completely contradictory to that of
the expert’s then the credibility of the eye-witness comes into question and must be
necessarily established beyond doubt
 Question: Can an expert be tried for perjury?
Answer: No. An expert is not considered a witness by the Court. The court merely
relies on his opinion but is not bound by it. The same was held in the case of Prem
Sagar Manocha v. NCT Delhi

45A- This section says that the opinion of examiner of electronic evidence, as given in
Section 79A of the IT Act is to be taken in cases where the court has to form an opinion about
any information stored in any computer or in any digital form. But Section 45A will come
into play only when the evidence produced is in due compliance of the terms of Section 65B.

SECTION 46
This section simply states that any statement which contradicts or supports an opinion by the
experts would be considered relevant. Since any information supporting or contradicting a
relevant information becomes relevant itself under Sec. 9, a statement rebutting or bolstering
the expert opinion would too be relevant.

SECTION 47
This section says that in cases where there is a need to ascertain whether a particular
document has been written or signed by a particular person or not, the opinion of a person
familiar with the handwriting of the said person would be relevant. A person will be said to
be familiar with the handwriting of a person if he has seen the said person write or sign of has
received documents in his handwriting or with his signature.
47A: Section 47A talks about the opinion of the certifying authority who issued the
electronic certificate when the authenticity of an electronic signature is in question. Such an
opinion would be considered relevant in a court of law.

SECTION 48
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.

SECTION 49
Sec 49 states that the court must form an opinion as to
- The usage and tenets of any body of men or family
- The constitution and government of any religious or charitable foundation
- The meaning of words or terms used in particular districts or by particular classes of
people
The opinions of persons having special knowledge and the means to get such knowledge
thereon would be considered relevant facts.

SECTION 50
This section says that in cases where the court has to form an opinion regarding the existence
or nature of a relationship between two or more people, the opinion or statement of a person
who has special knowledge regarding the existence or nature of said relationship will be
relevant to the proceedings.
This opinion does not imply hearsay or gossip. It means conviction or belief of a particular
person. This belief may be reflected in the outward behaviour of the person and as much may
be regarded as evidence.

SECTION 51
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.

SECTION 52 TO 55- CHARACTER WHEN RELEVANT

Sec. 52 to 55 lay down the circumstances where the courts may or may not consider the
character or conduct of the accused in determining his guilt or innocence. They are
summarised below:
1. In a civil case, the character or conduct of a person in so far as it is used to establish
the probability or improbability of his actions is irrelevant.
2. In a criminal case, previous good conduct is relevant
3. Previous bad character is irrelevant in a criminal case
4. Where character affects the amount of damages to be received it becomes relevant.

In sections 52 to 55, the word "character" includes both reputation and disposition; but
[except as provided in section 54], evidence may be given only of general reputation and
general disposition, and not of particular acts by which reputation or disposition were
shown
 CHAPTER 3

FACTS WHICH NEED NOT BE PROVED

There are some facts in a case which although relevant, need not be proved in a Court of law.
Evidence of such facts need not be given since the court already knows about them or the
other party has admitted it. These types of facts are dealt from Section 56 to 58 of the
Evidence Act.

SECTION 56
This section simply states that the facts of which the court takes judicial notice need not be
proved in court.

Question: What is Judicial notice?

Answer: Judicial notice is a rule in the law of evidence which allows certain facts to be
introduced in the court as evidence if the truth of such facts is so well known or
notorious that it can’t be reasonably doubted.

SECTION 57
This section lists out 13 facts regarding which the court has to take judicial notic.
Out of those 13 items, items mentioned from section 1 to 3 come under the topic of law and
custom, items 4 to 7 come under the topic of public administration and items 8 to 13 come
under the head of common knowledge.
It is provided that besides those cases explicitly mentioned in the section, the court has to
take judicial notice in matters of public history, literature, science or art, the Court may resort
for its aid to appropriate books or documents of reference.
It is also provided that if the court is asked by any person to take judicial notice on any matter
then the court can refuse to do so unless the books or documents or other things as the court
may find it necessary to examine before taking the judicial notice is provided.

SECTION 58
This section says that the facts admitted by a party during hearing or before hearing in writing
or by any rule of pleading in force at the time of the case need not be proved and the court
can take judicial notice of such facts, however, this section also says that if the court wants it
can ask for proof of those admissions.

CHAPTER 4
ORAL EVIDENCE

SECTION 59
This section states that all facts except the contents of documents or electronic records, may
be proved by oral evidence.

SECTION 60
This section states that all oral evidence must be direct. It must be given by the person
competent to give such an evidence. If such evidence refers to any fact which could be seen,
heard or perceived it must be given by a person who had the capability to see, hear or
perceive said evidence. If it refers to an opinion held by a person, it must be the evidence of
the person who holds such an opinion.
Provided also 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 5
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
SECTION 61
This section states that if a document is produced before a court, it may either be produced by
primary or by secondary evidence.

SECTION 62
Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the Court.
Explanation 1— Where a document is executed in several parts, each part is primary
evidence of the document.
Explanation 2.—Where a 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.

SECTION 63
This section lays down the all that constitutes as secondary evidence:
- Certified copies of the original document
- Copies made by mechanical processes
- Copies made from or compared with the original
- Counterpart of a document is secondary evidence against the party who did not sign it
- Oral account of the contents of the document by a person who has himself seen it.
This list is not exhaustive and all the secondary evidence stand equal in ranking i.e. it is not
required that the evidence of succeeding category can only be given when the preceding
category is not available.

PROOF OF DOCUMENTS
SECTION 64
Documents must be proved by primary evidence except in the cases mentioned in the
succeeding sections.
SECTION 65
This section provides the cases where secondary evidence can be provided. They are given in
clauses a to g of the Sec. 65 of the Act:
- When the original is shown or appears to be in possession of someone against whom
it is to be produced or who is out of reach or not subject to the court or is not legally
bound to produce it if he is, does not produce it to the court even after being sent a
notice
- When the existence, conditions or contents of a document have been proved to be
admitted in writing by the party against whom it will be produced or by his
representative
- When the original is lost or destroyed without any fault of the party and cannot be
reproduced in a reasonable time.
- If the document is bulky and cannot be moved
- If the document is not a public document
- When the original’s certified copies can be given as evidence as provided under the
evidence law or any other law of the country.
- When the original consists of a lot of accounts or documents which cannot be
conveniently examined by the court and the fact to be proved is a general result of the
whole collected.
After meeting the necessary circumstances, if secondary evidence has been admitted by the
court without any objection by the other party, the party cannot object to it at a later stage
65A- This section states that the contents of electronic records may be proved in accordance
with Section 65B:
- The computer output containing the information is produced by the computer which is
used to store and process data in the regular course of business by a person with
lawful authority to do so.
- The information fed is of the kind usually stored in the computer in the course of
ordinary business
- The computer was in fine working condition when the information in question was
fed to it.
- The information in the record was derived or reproduced from the information fed
into the computer in the ordinary course of activities.

Computer output is anything printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied to a

computer.

SECTION 66
This section of the Act deals with situations where secondary evidence can be produced
without giving any notice. Such circumstances are listed below:
- When the document itself is a notice
- When the nature of the case is such that the party in possession is required to produce
it
- When it is clear that the party has obtained the original document with fraud or force
- When the adverse party or his agent has the original in court
- When the adverse party has admitted that the original is lost
- When the person in possession is out of reach or not subject to the court.

SECTION 67
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.
67A: This section states that if it is alleged, that a subscriber’s electronic signature is affixed
to an electronic record, the same shall be proved by the part alleging it.

SECTION 68
This section states that if a document is required by law to be attested, it shall not be used as
evidence until at least one attesting witness has been called for tat purpose.
SECTION 69
This section states that if no such attesting witness, mentioned in the above sections, 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 documents is in the
handwriting of that person.

SECTION 70
This section states that when an executant himself admits te execution of the document, there
is no need to call for an attesting witness.

SECTION 71
This states that if the attesting witness denies or does not remember execution of the
document, the document can be proved by other methods

SECTION 72
It states that an attested document which was not required by law to be attested shall be
proved as it was not attested.

SECTION 73
This section states that in order to ascertain whether a sign, writing or seal was made by a
person, the court may compare it with a sign, writing or seal proved to be made by the
person. The court may also direct any person present in the court to write any words or
figures for the purpose of this section and this section also applies to fingerprints.

73A- This section states that 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.

For the purposes of this section, "Controller" means the Controller appointed under
sub-section (1) of section 17 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
SECTION 74
This section defines public documents forming the acts or records of the act:
- Of the sovereign authority
- Of official bodies and tribunal
- Of public officers, legislative, judicial and executive, of India or of a commonwealth
or of a foreign country
- By clause (2), public records kept in any State of private documents, such as,
memorandum of article of a company with the Registrar of companies.

SECTION 75
This section defines private documents as those which are not public documents

SECTION 77
This section states that the certified copies may be produced as proof of the contents of the
public document or a part of them which they purport to be copies.

SECTION 78
This section provides for proof of other public documents.
- For acts order or notifications by central or state governments- it must be certified by
the respective head of the department.
- For legislature proceedings- proof by their journal or by published acts or abstracts
- For municipalities- the copy should be certified by the legal keeper
- Public documents of foreign countries- by the original or it should either be signed
by a legal keeper or an Indian diplomatic agent or an officer having legal custody of
the original document.

PRESUMPTIONS AS TO DOCUMENTS
Section 79 to 90 of the Indian Evidence Act provides various presumptions as to the
documents. There are certain presumptions regarding the documentary evidence in this act.
According to the Indian Evidence Act, the presumption is of two types. There are certain
cases in which the Court “shall presume” and in certain cases, it “may presume”. The terms
are defined in Sec. 4 of the Act.

SECTION 79
This section states that the courts shall presume a document if it is a certificate or a certified
copy. Additionally, any document which is by law declared to be admissible as evidence and
has been certified by an officer of the central or state govt. Provided, that the document is
executed in the form prescribed by law.

SECTION 80
This section states that in case where a certified copy of a testimony, given by a person in
another case, is produced and such testimony is relevant in the case before the court, the
certified copy of the same shall be presumed genuine.

SECTION 81
By virtue of this section, copies of acts of Parliament, official gazettes, newspapers and
journals are presumed to be genuine. It is, however, necessary that such documents must be
kept on substantial form and produced from proper custody.
An electronic record of the above-mentioned documents is also considered genuine if kept in
substantial form in accordance with law.19

SECTION 83
This section states that if maps and plans are made by the State or Central govt., they shall be
presumed to be accurate. However, plans made for a specific cause or purpose must be
proved to be accurate.

SECTION 84
This section states that all books containing reports and laws published by the authority of the
govt shall be deemed genuine by the courts.

SECTION 85
This section states that a power of attorney, approved by the Notary, any Magistrate, Indian
Consul or Vice-Consul, shall be deemed to be genuine.
85A- The court shall presume that every electronic agreement concluded by affixing
electronic signatures of the party shall be genuine
85B- The court presumes electronic records to be genuine and electronic signatures to be
made by the subscriber with the intention of approving electronic record until the contrary is
provided.

19
Section 81A of the Act.
85C- The court presumes that the information listed in an electronic signature certificate is
correct, except for the subscriber information if the subscriber accepted the certificate.

SECTION 87
This section states that the court may presume any information provided in books, charts or
maps, that is used to prove a fact in issue, to be genuine and accurate.

SECTION 88
This sections states that the court may presume that the message sent to the post office was
the message forwarded through telegram and it was received by the person who was
purported to receive it.
88A- The court may presume that an electronic message forwarded by the originator to the
addressee via an electronic mail server corresponds with the message as fed into his computer
for transmission. In both, Sec 88 and 88A, the court cannot presume who delivered the
message.

SECTION 89
This section states that it is a compulsory presumption on behalf of the court that every
document that is called for inspection and the documents are not produced even after the
notice period, it is presumed that the documents are attested, stamped and executed in the
manner which is prescribed by law.

SECTION 90
This section states that if a document produced in court is thirty years or older and was kept
in proper custody for the duration of its existence, the handwriting and signature on the
document will be considered genuine. It further states that the court shall also assume that the
document was duly attested and executed if the same is purported for the document.