11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

All you need to know about Section 3 of the

Indian Evidence Act, 1872
By Rachit Garg - March 23, 2022

This article is written by Shivi Khanna, a student of the School of Law, Sushant
University, Gurgaon. This article is an attempt to examine and understand the key terms
described in the interpretation clause i.e., Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Table of Contents 
1. Introduction
2. Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872
2.1. Interpretation clause
3. Court
4. Fact
4.1. Physical and psychological facts
4.2. Positive and negative facts
4.3. Facts in issue
4.4. Relevant facts
5. Document
6. Evidence
6.1. Oral evidence
6.1.1. Hearsay evidence
6.2. Documentary evidence
6.2.1. Primary evidence
6.2.2. Secondary evidence
6.3. Classification of evidence
6.3.1. Direct and circumstantial evidence
6.3.2. Real and personal evidence
6.3.3. Original and unoriginal evidence
6.3.4. Substantive and non-substantive evidence
6.3.5. Positive and negative evidence
6.3.6. Prosecution evidence and defence evidence
7. Proved
8. Disproved
9. Not proved
10. Conclusion
11. References

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 1/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

Introduction
The primary objectives of the law of evidence are to aid the courts in ascertaining the
truth, to prevent inquiries from becoming drawn-out and prolonging the judicial process,
and to ensure that judges do not grow confused or muddled due to irrelevant or
inconsequential evidence. The origin of the law of evidence in India can be traced to the
concepts enshrined in English law. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (henceforth referred to
as the Act), which governs the rule of law of evidence in India is not exhaustive,
therefore, English law can be used as a reference while interpreting the provisions of the
aforementioned Act. However, principles of English law inconsistent with the Act cannot
be applied.

Evidence which does not fall under the Act, is not admissible in court, even if it is the key
to determining the truth of the matter. Furthermore, the parties cannot opt-out of
following the provisions of the Act through means, such as contracts, nor do courts have
the power to neglect relevant facts using the pretext of conforming to public policy.

Evidence law is supported by three main pillars: 1) Evidence should only consist of
matters in issue; 2) Hearsay evidence does not have evidentiary value; 3) There should
be an effort to provide the best evidence in all cases.

Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is an important clause that provides the
definition of important terms that appear throughout the Act. Section 3 clearly defines
what constitutes a court i.e., who is authorised by this Act to collect evidence and reach
a decision. Section 3 also states what is a fact, what is relevant, the different types of
evidence, documents, how a fact is proved, disproved and not proved. The significance
of Section 3 lies in how it sets up the reading of the rest of the Act, and the
interpretation of evidence law according to it.

Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Interpretation clause
Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 contains details on the interpretation of the
terms – Court, Fact, Relevant, Facts in issue, Document, Evidence, Proved, Disproved,
Not Proved, India – unless the context implies a contrary intention.

Court
‘Court’ consists of all judges and magistrates, and any person who is legally authorised
to take evidence, with the exception of arbitrators and tribunals. Arbitrators and
tribunals function on the basis of natural justice and are authorised to collect evidence,
however, they do not come under the definition of “Court” within the meaning of this Act.

In C.I.T v. East Court Commercial Co. Ltd. (1967), it was held that income tax
authorities do not fall under the definition of “Court.”

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 2/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

It is interesting to note that the 69th Law Commission Report recommended making a
comprehensive definition of “Court” to avoid confusion. The Law Commission’s definition
included civil, criminal, revenue courts and tribunals within the definition of “Court.”
However, the definition of “Court” has not been amended to include revenue courts or
tribunals till date.

In Brajnandan Sinha v. Jyoti Narain (1956), the Supreme Court delved into the definition
of “Court” and came to the conclusion, that such a body or forum must be capable of
making a decision or judgement which is final and authoritative in nature. This is the
basic quality of a judicial pronouncement, and a salient characteristic of a “Court.” 

Fact
‘Fact’ may be defined as:

Any thing, state of things, relation of things, that can be sensed (external fact).

For instance –

When certain things are placed in a certain way/pattern, it is a fact.

When a person sees or hears something, it is a fact.

The words spoken by a person, is a fact.

Any mental condition of which any person is conscious (internal fact).

For instance–

The opinion of a person.

The intentions of a person.

A person acting in good faith/fraudulently.

The deliberate choice of a person’s words.

Feeling a certain sensation at a certain time.

A person’s reputation.

Physical and psychological facts

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 3/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

Physical facts are those that can be discovered through the use of a person’s senses. For
instance, observing the arrangement of certain objects, hearing the distinct sound of a
horn, etc. However, the law of evidence is not restricted to physical facts “only”. Beyond,
physical facts lie psychological facts which are based on the mental condition of a
person. For instance, when a person commits fraud, his intention to deceive the other
party is also a fact.

Positive and negative facts

When the existence of a situation or state of things can be confirmed, it is a positive
fact. For instance, in a property dispute case, the deceased left a will to bequeath his
property. The existence of the will is a positive fact. On the other hand, the non-
existence of a situation or state of things is a negative fact. For instance, the lack of a
weapon at the scene of a murder.

Facts in issue
Facts in issue are those facts that are sought to be proved and are also called “principal
facts” or factum probandum. When the rights and liabilities of the parties are dependent
on a fact that is in dispute or controversy, that fact is in issue.

For example, ‘X’ is accused of defaming ‘Y’ through libel. The possible facts may be in
issue: that ‘X’ caused damage to ‘Y’s reputation; ‘Y’s business suffered losses due to ‘X’s
defamation; ‘X’ wrote and published defamatory statements about ‘Y’ out of malice, etc.

Facts in issue determine the arguments of both the plaintiffs and defendants. The parties
must prove that the facts in issue lean toward their pleadings in order to sway the
court’s decision in their favour. The substantive law applicable to the offence determines
what constitutes the facts in issue. In criminal cases, facts in issue depend on the
contents of the charge-sheet, whereas, in civil cases the framing of issues takes place.

Facts in issue form the foundation upon which the parties argue their case, and when
these facts are proved to the satisfaction of the court, a decision can be made.

Relevant facts
Relevant facts are those which are needed to prove or disprove a fact in issue. Relevant
facts are also called evidentiary facts (factum probans). These facts are not in issue –
they are not the main issue of controversy or dispute between the parties. Rather,
relevant or evidentiary facts dig deeper into the context or circumstances of the facts in
issue, and help to draw inferences about them.

Admissions and confessions, statements by those who are not witnesses, precedents
from case laws, statements made under special circumstances, facts which form a chain
of logic with facts in issue, third party opinions, and evidence as to the character of a
person – all these fall under the category of relevant facts.

Relevant facts indicate a relationship between facts, which according to a sound chain of
logic and common sense, either prove or disprove the existence of each other. Relevant
https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 4/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

facts act as supplementary material to sway the opinion of the court in favour of the
party making the argument with respect to the facts in issue.

For example, ‘A’ is accused of committing theft. A relevant fact would be that ‘A’ has had
a history of pickpocketing and shoplifting, and has been prosecuted before. The fact in
issue would be – whether A has committed theft.

Document
A document within the meaning of this Act, is any writing, marks, figures inscribed on a
surface for the purpose of recording a matter. In R v. Daye (1908) the Court observed
that the notches made by bakers and milkmen on wood to indicate the amount of bread
or milk supplied are also documents. The surface upon which the writing or marks are
inscribed is not restricted to paper. Writings, words in photographs, maps, plans,
inscriptions on metallic surfaces – all these fall within the category of document.

Evidence
The origin of the term ‘evidence’ can be traced to the Latin words “evident” or “evidere”
– meaning to discover, determine or arrive at the truth. Evidence also implies – to make
clear, certain, notorious. Evidence plays a key role in the judicial process by supporting
or building an argument before the court, with respect to proving or disproving a matter
of fact or controversy, between the parties.

Oral evidence
Covered in detail under Section 59 and 60 of the Act, oral evidence can be defined as the
statements made by witnesses which are allowed or needed by the court. These
statements by witnesses help determine the matter in issue or controversy between the
parties. When a witness orally makes a statement it is regarded as oral evidence.
Witness testimony has also been called ‘living proof.’ However, in the cases where a
witness is unable to speak, then communication through signs or writing is also
admissible as oral evidence.

Usually, all evidence that is not written in documents is oral evidence and is sufficient to
prove a fact or title. However, according to Section 60, in the presence of both
documentary evidence and oral evidence, the former takes precedence.

Oral evidence must be direct i.e., the witness making the statement must have seen or
heard, or experienced the event first-hand.

Hearsay evidence
Whenever information passes through indirect channels, such as rumours or gossip, it
can be termed as ‘hearsay.’ Hearsay evidence is that information which has not been
obtained through direct means, and has not been experienced by the witness firsthand.
Hearsay evidence is not admissible in court and does not hold evidentiary value.

However, hearsay evidence is admissible in the case of the following exceptions:

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 5/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

A statement made by someone other than a witness becomes admissible when it is

part of the transaction in question according to the principle of res gestae in Section
6. For example, an hour before a murder took place, ‘A’ heard ‘B’ making death
threats to the victim inside the victim’s house. B’s death threats before the murder
were part of the transaction in question as the murder took place an hour later.

The testimony of a witness to whom a confession or admission was made outside the
court.

Dying declaration made under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Entries in books of account in the course of business under Section 34; entries in
public registers under Section 35.

Under Section 60, in the absence or death of experts, their thoughts and words
expressed in their treatises and books can be counted as evidence.

When a slanderous statement is made in the presence of a witness, the witness can
testify as to the fact that the statement was made.

Documentary evidence
Documentary evidence is covered by Section 61-90 of the Act. All documents submitted
to the court for scrutiny fall under the umbrella of documentary evidence. Documentary
evidence holds precedence as compared to oral evidence, in terms of both credibility and
permanence. Documentary evidence is also called ‘dead proof.’ Due to the improvement
in technology and the coming up of legislation such as the IT Act, 2000, electronic
evidence has also been included within the purview of documentary evidence.

Documentary evidence can be of two types: 1) primary evidence, and 2) secondary

evidence.

Primary evidence
Primary evidence includes the original document; a document executed in separate
parts; a document that has been manufactured or produced by one uniform, mass
process (for example, photographs, lithographs, etc).

Secondary evidence
Secondary evidence includes certified copies of the original document. Also, when
original documents are used to make a large number of copies through a mechanical
process, for example, by printing, photocopying, etc.

Classification of evidence
Evidence can be classified into various types and is not restricted to a narrow, rigid
definition.

Direct and circumstantial evidence

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 6/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

Direct evidence directly addresses the fact in issue or the matter of controversy between
parties. It includes both the statement of witnesses and documentary evidence. For
example, ‘A’ witnessed ‘B’ killing ‘C’ with a knife. ‘A’s witness testimony of the murder of
‘C’ by ‘B’, is direct evidence. Direct evidence takes precedence over circumstantial
evidence. Direct evidence depends on the credibility of the witness testimony and the
documents submitted.

Whereas, circumstantial evidence is based upon relevant facts that prove or disprove the
fact in issue. Circumstantial evidence must prove the guilt of the accused beyond doubt
if it is to be admissible in court. Circumstantial evidence takes the indirect route to prove
or disprove the fact in issue, however, it must not be confused with secondary evidence.

In cases like Umedbhai v. the State of Gujarat (1977) and Gade Lakshmi Mangraju v.
the State of Andhra Pradesh (2001), when a chain of circumstantial evidence forms a
cumulative effect through a sound logic chain, and the circumstances are conclusive in
nature, and prove the guilt of the accused beyond doubt, then circumstantial evidence is
very much admissible in court.

Real and personal evidence

Real evidence consists of the assumptions or conclusions the court draws from the
information available to it. For example, DNA found at the crime scene; the nervous
behaviour of the accused before the judge; fingerprints found on the murder weapon,
etc. Personal evidence is obtained through human agency.

Original and unoriginal evidence

Original evidence is firsthand evidence, which a witness has personally experienced
through his own senses. Whereas, unoriginal evidence is secondary or hearsay and has
been learned indirectly through a third party.

Substantive and non-substantive evidence

Substantive evidence is that evidence which does not need to be corroborated and
serves to prove or disprove a fact in issue. Substantive evidence can be both
circumstantial or direct. Non-substantive evidence does not hold enough weight by itself
and is not sufficient to prove or disprove a fact.

Positive and negative evidence

Positive evidence proves that an event has taken place or that a certain fact exists.
Whereas, negative evidence proves that a fact does not exist.

Prosecution evidence and defence evidence

Evidence used by the prosecution to prove the guilt of the defendant or accused is called
prosecution evidence. On the other hand, the evidence used by the defendant to prove
his innocence is called defence evidence.

Proved
https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 7/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

When the court believes beyond a reasonable doubt in the existence of a certain fact or
believes that a reasonable man would be likely to act in a certain manner on the basis of
his belief that said fact exists, then the fact is said to be “proved.”

Disproved
When the court believes beyond reasonable doubt that a fact does not exist, and that a
reasonable man would upon knowing the details of the case, act on the belief that the
fact does not exist, the fact is said to be “disproved.”

Not proved
A fact is said to be “not proved” when it is neither proved nor disproved, and a
reasonable man would not believe in the existence or the non-existence of the fact.

Conclusion
The law of evidence is a key tool to aid the judiciary in weaving and sorting through the
vast information each case presents. Only evidence which falls under the Indian
Evidence Act, 1872 is admissible and has evidentiary value. This prevents the court from
wasting its time and helps the court in quickly gaining access to the relevant and correct
evidence needed to determine the outcome of a case. Section 3 of the Indian Evidence
Act, 1872, is an interpretation and definitions clause that describes key terms and
concepts used in the Act, and in deciphering evidence law. 

References
http://indiankanoon.org/

https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1031309/

https://legislative.gov.in/sites/default/files/A1872-01.pdf 

https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/lawreports/reformofjudicial/80.php?
Title=&STitle=The%20Law%20of%20Evidence

R v Daye, [1908] 2 KB 333

C.I.T v. East Court Commercial Co. Ltd (1967)

Brajnandan Sinha v Jyoti Narain (1956)

Umedbhai v State of Gujarat

Gade Lakshmi Mangraju v State of Andhra Pradesh

https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/lawreports/evidenceact1872/3.php?
Title=Review%20of%20the%20Indian%20Evidence%20Act,%201872&STitle=Section%2

Ashok Jain, Law of Evidence, Ascent Publications, 2014

Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on

practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life
practical skills.
https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 8/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and
various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:

https://t.me/lawyerscommunity

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our YouTube channel for more amazing legal

content.

Did you find this blog post helpful? Subscribe so that you never miss another post! Just complete this
form…

Name

Email Address

10-6=?

SUBSCRIBE!

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 9/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

26th to 27st November, 6 - 9 p.m IST (each day)

Free Online 2-Day Bootcamp On How can experienced

professionals become Independent Directors

Harsh Jain Co-Founder,

LawSikho

Abhyuday Agarwal COO & Co-Founder,

LawSikho

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 10/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

Register now
Name

Your Name
Email

Your Email
Which country are you from?
Select your country
Select your country

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 11/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

Select your country

+91 - IN (India)
+376 - AD (Andorra)
+971 - AE (United Arab Emirates)
+93 - AF (Afghanistan)
+1268 - AG (Antigua And Barbuda)
+1264 - AI (Anguilla)
+355 - AL (Albania)
+374 - AM (Armenia)
+599 - AN (Netherlands Antilles)
+244 - AO (Angola)
+672 - AQ (Antarctica)
+54 - AR (Argentina)
+1684 - AS (American Samoa)
+43 - AT (Austria)
+61 - AU (Australia)
+297 - AW (Aruba)
+994 - AZ (Azerbaijan)
+387 - BA (Bosnia And Herzegovina)
+1246 - BB (Barbados)
+880 - BD (Bangladesh)
+32 - BE (Belgium)
+226 - BF (Burkina Faso)
+359 - BG (Bulgaria)
+973 - BH (Bahrain)
+257 - BI (Burundi)
+229 - BJ (Benin)
+590 - BL (Saint Barthelemy)
+1441 - BM (Bermuda)
+673 - BN (Brunei Darussalam)
+591 - BO (Bolivia)
+55 - BR (Brazil)
+1242 - BS (Bahamas)
+975 - BT (Bhutan)
+267 - BW (Botswana)
+375 - BY (Belarus)
+501 - BZ (Belize)
+1 - CA (Canada)
+61 - CC (Cocos (keeling) Islands)
+243 - CD (Congo, The Democratic Republic Of The)
+236 - CF (Central African Republic)
+242 - CG (Congo)
+41 - CH (Switzerland)
+225 - CI (Cote D Ivoire)
+682 - CK (Cook Islands)
+56 - CL (Chile)
+237 - CM (Cameroon)
+86 - CN (China)
+57 - CO (Colombia)
+506 - CR (Costa Rica)
+53 - CU (Cuba)
+238 - CV (Cape Verde)
+61 - CX (Christmas Island)
+357 - CY (Cyprus)

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 12/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

+420 - CZ (Czech Republic)

+49 - DE (Germany)
+253 - DJ (Djibouti)
+45 - DK (Denmark)
+1767 - DM (Dominica)
+1809 - DO (Dominican Republic)
+213 - DZ (Algeria)
+593 - EC (Ecuador)
+372 - EE (Estonia)
+20 - EG (Egypt)
+291 - ER (Eritrea)
+34 - ES (Spain)
+251 - ET (Ethiopia)
+358 - FI (Finland)
+679 - FJ (Fiji)
+500 - FK (Falkland Islands (malvinas))
+691 - FM (Micronesia, Federated States Of)
+298 - FO (Faroe Islands)
+33 - FR (France)
+241 - GA (Gabon)
+44 - GB (United Kingdom)
+1473 - GD (Grenada)
+995 - GE (Georgia)
+233 - GH (Ghana)
+350 - GI (Gibraltar)
+299 - GL (Greenland)
+220 - GM (Gambia)
+224 - GN (Guinea)
+240 - GQ (Equatorial Guinea)
+30 - GR (Greece)
+502 - GT (Guatemala)
+1671 - GU (Guam)
+245 - GW (Guinea-bissau)
+592 - GY (Guyana)
+852 - HK (Hong Kong)
+504 - HN (Honduras)
+385 - HR (Croatia)
+509 - HT (Haiti)
+36 - HU (Hungary)
+62 - ID (Indonesia)
+353 - IE (Ireland)
+972 - IL (Israel)
+44 - IM (Isle Of Man)
+964 - IQ (Iraq)
+98 - IR (Iran, Islamic Republic Of)
+354 - IS (Iceland)
+39 - IT (Italy)
+1876 - JM (Jamaica)
+962 - JO (Jordan)
+81 - JP (Japan)
+254 - KE (Kenya)
+996 - KG (Kyrgyzstan)
+855 - KH (Cambodia)
+686 - KI (Kiribati)

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 13/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

+269 - KM (Comoros)
+1869 - KN (Saint Kitts And Nevis)
+850 - KP (Korea Democratic Peoples Republic Of)
+82 - KR (Korea Republic Of)
+965 - KW (Kuwait)
+1345 - KY (Cayman Islands)
+7 - KZ (Kazakstan)
+856 - LA (Lao Peoples Democratic Republic)
+961 - LB (Lebanon)
+1758 - LC (Saint Lucia)
+423 - LI (Liechtenstein)
+94 - LK (Sri Lanka)
+231 - LR (Liberia)
+266 - LS (Lesotho)
+370 - LT (Lithuania)
+352 - LU (Luxembourg)
+371 - LV (Latvia)
+218 - LY (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya)
+212 - MA (Morocco)
+377 - MC (Monaco)
+373 - MD (Moldova, Republic Of)
+382 - ME (Montenegro)
+1599 - MF (Saint Martin)
+261 - MG (Madagascar)
+692 - MH (Marshall Islands)
+389 - MK (Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic Of)
+223 - ML (Mali)
+95 - MM (Myanmar)
+976 - MN (Mongolia)
+853 - MO (Macau)
+1670 - MP (Northern Mariana Islands)
+222 - MR (Mauritania)
+1664 - MS (Montserrat)
+356 - MT (Malta)
+230 - MU (Mauritius)
+960 - MV (Maldives)
+265 - MW (Malawi)
+52 - MX (Mexico)
+60 - MY (Malaysia)
+258 - MZ (Mozambique)
+264 - NA (Namibia)
+687 - NC (New Caledonia)
+227 - NE (Niger)
+234 - NG (Nigeria)
+505 - NI (Nicaragua)
+31 - NL (Netherlands)
+47 - NO (Norway)
+977 - NP (Nepal)
+674 - NR (Nauru)
+683 - NU (Niue)
+64 - NZ (New Zealand)
+968 - OM (Oman)
+507 - PA (Panama)
+51 - PE (Peru)

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 14/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

+689 - PF (French Polynesia)

+675 - PG (Papua New Guinea)
+63 - PH (Philippines)
+92 - PK (Pakistan)
+48 - PL (Poland)
+508 - PM (Saint Pierre And Miquelon)
+870 - PN (Pitcairn)
+1 - PR (Puerto Rico)
+351 - PT (Portugal)
+680 - PW (Palau)
+595 - PY (Paraguay)
+974 - QA (Qatar)
+40 - RO (Romania)
+381 - RS (Serbia)
+7 - RU (Russian Federation)
+250 - RW (Rwanda)
+966 - SA (Saudi Arabia)
+677 - SB (Solomon Islands)
+248 - SC (Seychelles)
+249 - SD (Sudan)
+46 - SE (Sweden)
+65 - SG (Singapore)
+290 - SH (Saint Helena)
+386 - SI (Slovenia)
+421 - SK (Slovakia)
+232 - SL (Sierra Leone)
+378 - SM (San Marino)
+221 - SN (Senegal)
+252 - SO (Somalia)
+597 - SR (Suriname)
+239 - ST (Sao Tome And Principe)
+503 - SV (El Salvador)
+963 - SY (Syrian Arab Republic)
+268 - SZ (Swaziland)
+1649 - TC (Turks And Caicos Islands)
+235 - TD (Chad)
+228 - TG (Togo)
+66 - TH (Thailand)
+992 - TJ (Tajikistan)
+690 - TK (Tokelau)
+670 - TL (Timor-leste)
+993 - TM (Turkmenistan)
+216 - TN (Tunisia)
+676 - TO (Tonga)
+90 - TR (Turkey)
+1868 - TT (Trinidad And Tobago)
+688 - TV (Tuvalu)
+886 - TW (Taiwan, Province Of China)
+255 - TZ (Tanzania, United Republic Of)
+380 - UA (Ukraine)
+256 - UG (Uganda)
+1 - US (United States)
+598 - UY (Uruguay)
+998 - UZ (Uzbekistan)

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 15/16
11/28/22, 8:19 AM All you need to know about Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - iPleaders

+39 - VA (Holy See (vatican City State))

+1784 - VC (Saint Vincent And The Grenadines)
+58 - VE (Venezuela)
+1284 - VG (Virgin Islands, British)
+1340 - VI (Virgin Islands, U.s.)
+84 - VN (Viet Nam)
+678 - VU (Vanuatu)
+681 - WF (Wallis And Futuna)
+685 - WS (Samoa)
+381 - XK (Kosovo)
+967 - YE (Yemen)
+262 - YT (Mayotte)
+27 - ZA (South Africa)
+260 - ZM (Zambia)
+263 - ZW (Zimbabwe)
No results

Phone

Your Phone
I want to know more about the lawsikho courses

Yes

No
Register now
Bootcamp starting in
0
Days
0
HRS
0
MIN
0
SEC
TIME UP

Harsh Jain Co-Founder,

LawSikho

Abhyuday Agarwal COO & Co-Founder,

LawSikho

https://blog.ipleaders.in/all-you-need-to-know-about-section-3-of-the-indian-evidence-act-1872/ 16/16