Bharatiya Saksha Adhiniyam 2023

Set of Important Questions- Answers

Prof. Brijesha V. Reddy
Exam Writing Tips:
1.Define the concept clearly.
2.Mention relevant sections of BSA 2023.
3.Include at least 3-4 case laws.
4.Use examples and illustrations for better understanding.

Long Answers: Detailed, structured, and exam-oriented 2 to 3

page answers.

Question 1: Burden of Proof

Burden of Proof – Meaning and Legal Provisions

Introduction
The concept of burden of proof is fundamental in both civil and
criminal proceedings. It determines which party must prove certain
facts to establish their claim or defense. Under the Bharatiya
Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023), the burden of proof is
governed by Sections 104 to 114.
The burden of proof is based on the principle that a person who
asserts a fact must prove it. If a party fails to discharge this burden,
their case may be dismissed. This principle ensures fairness and
justice in legal proceedings.

Meaning and Definition of Burden of Proof

The term "burden of proof" means the responsibility to prove the
existence of a fact in a legal case. It includes two aspects:
1. Legal Burden (Primary Burden) – The duty of a party to prove
their case in court.
 2. Evidential Burden (Shifting Burden) – The duty to produce
evidence when the opponent raises a valid defense.
Section/105:
" The burden of proof in a suit proceedings, lies on the party who
would fail if no evidence were given on either side."
Illustration:
1.If A files a suit against B claiming ownership of a property, A
must prove ownership.
2.If B claims A has already sold the property to him, B must
prove the sale.

General Principles of Burden of Proof

The burden of proof follows certain principles:
1. The Party Making an Allegation Must Prove It (Section 105, BSA
2023)
The party bringing a claim must provide evidence to support it.
Example: In a case of theft, the prosecution must prove the
accused stole the item. The accused does not need to prove their
innocence.
2. Shifting of Burden of Proof
While the initial burden lies on the plaintiff or prosecution, it can shift
to the defendant once the plaintiff/prosecution provides enough
evidence.
Example:
If a person is found with stolen goods, the burden shifts to
them to prove they obtained the goods legally.
3. Burden of Proof in Criminal Cases (Section 104, BSA 2023)
The prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The accused is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
Case Law: Woolmington v. DPP (1935)
The House of Lords ruled that the burden of proof in criminal
cases always lies on the prosecution and not on the accused.
Specific Provisions of Burden of Proof under BSA 2023
1. Burden of Proving a Fact (Section 104, BSA 2023)
If a person wants the court to believe in a fact, they must
provide evidence for it.
The burden does not shift unless strong evidence is presented.
Example:
If a person claims they were present at a location at a certain
time, they must provide proof such as CCTV footage or
witnesses.
2. Burden of Proving Exceptions in Criminal Law (Section 105, BSA
2023)
If the accused claims a legal exception (e.g., self-defense,
insanity), they must prove it.
Example:
If a person kills someone in self-defense, they must prove the
attack was sudden and unavoidable.
3. Burden of Proving Death (Section 108, BSA 2023)
If a person has not been heard from for seven years, the
burden of proving they are alive rests on the person making
that claim.
Example:
If a missing person’s wife seeks a death certificate, she can rely
on Section 108, and anyone opposing it must prove the person
is alive.

Case Laws on Burden of Proof

1. State of Rajasthan v. Kishore (1996)
The Supreme Court ruled that the burden of proving the guilt
of the accused is always on the prosecution.
2. Babu v. State of Kerala (2010)
 The court held that if the prosecution fails to establish guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt, the benefit of doubt must go to
the accused.
3. M.S. Narayana Menon v. State of Kerala (2006)
In cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act, once a cheque
is dishonored, the burden shifts to the accused to prove they
had no liability.

Conclusion
The burden of proof plays a crucial role in ensuring fair trials. It
prevents wrongful convictions in criminal cases and ensures that civil
disputes are resolved based on evidence.
In criminal law, the burden of proof is always on the
prosecution, and the accused is presumed innocent until
proven guilty.
In civil law, the burden of proof rests on the party making a
claim but can shift based on presented evidence.
Understanding the rules of burden of proof under BSA 2023
(Sections 102-108) is essential for law students, legal practitioners,
and judges to ensure justice is served fairly.

Question 2: Estoppel – Definition and Legal Provisions

Introduction
The doctrine of estoppel is a fundamental principle in the law of
evidence. It prevents a person from denying or contradicting a
statement, act, or representation they previously made when
another party has relied on it. Estoppel ensures fairness and prevents
injustice by stopping individuals from going back on their words or
conduct.
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023) incorporates
estoppel under Sections 121 to 123, which define different types of
estoppel and their legal effects.

Definition of Estoppel
The term "estoppel" originates from the French word "estoupail",
meaning a stopper or barrier. In legal terms, estoppel prevents a
party from making statements contrary to their previous conduct or
declarations.
Section 121 of BSA 2023 – General Principle of Estoppel
"When a person has, by his declaration, act, or omission,
intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe
something to be true and to act upon such belief, he shall not be
allowed to deny the truth of that thing in a legal proceeding."
Key Elements of Estoppel
1. Representation or Conduct: A party must make a statement or
act in a way that creates a belief.
2. Reliance by Another Party: The other party must have relied on
that statement or act.
3. Change in Position: The party relying on the statement must
have acted on it and suffered harm if it is later denied.
Illustration:
 A tells B that he will sell his house for ₹50 lakh, and B invests
money in legal paperwork and a bank loan. Later, A refuses to
sell. A is estopped from denying the deal.

Types of Estoppel Under BSA 2023

1. Estoppel by Representation (Section 121, BSA 2023)
If a person intentionally makes a false statement or
representation, they cannot later deny its truth if someone has
relied on it.
Example:
 A bank official assures a customer that a loan has been
approved. If the customer makes financial decisions based on
this, the bank cannot later deny the approval.
2. Estoppel by Conduct
A person’s actions or inactions can create estoppel if another
party relies on them.
3. Estoppel in Legal Proceedings
 A party to a case cannot deny a fact already admitted in court.
Example:
If a person admits in court that they signed a contract, they
cannot later deny it
Example:
S.122 : A landlord allows a tenant to occupy a shop without
objecting for years. Later, he cannot claim that the tenancy was
illegal.
3. Promissory Estoppel (Section 123, BSA 2023)
 A promise made without consideration can still be enforced if
the other party relied on it and acted accordingly.
Case Law: Union of India v. Anglo Afghan Agencies (1968)
The Supreme Court held that if the government makes a
promise and a party acts based on it, the government cannot
back out later.
4. Estoppel Against Tenants and Licensees
Section 122, BSA 2023
A tenant or licensee cannot deny the title of the landlord during
their tenancy.
Example:
 A tenant cannot claim that the landlord does not own the
property while still occupying it.
5. Estoppel in Legal Proceedings (Section 121, BSA 2023)
 A party to a case cannot deny a fact already admitted in court.
Example:
 If a person admits in court that they signed a contract, they
cannot later deny it.
6. No Estoppel Against Law
 A person cannot be estopped from questioning the law.
Example:
 If a minor wrongly claims to be an adult and enters a contract,
they can still plead minority in court.

Case Laws on Estoppel

1. B.L. Sreedhar v. K.M. Munireddy (2003)
 The Supreme Court held that a tenant cannot deny the
landlord’s ownership while occupying the property.
2. Central London Property Trust Ltd. v. High Trees House Ltd. (1947)
 This case established promissory estoppel in English law. The
landlord promised reduced rent during wartime, and the court
held that he could not claim full rent for that period later.
3. Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills v. State of U.P. (1979)
 The Supreme Court ruled that government policies cannot be
revoked if industries rely on them.

Exceptions to Estoppel
Estoppel does not apply in the following cases:
1. Against Minors – A minor cannot be bound by estoppel in
contracts.
2. Against Government – Estoppel does not stop the government
from correcting illegal actions.
3. Against Law (Section 123, BSA 2023) – A person cannot be
estopped from challenging an illegal act.
Example:
 If a tax officer wrongly assures a company of zero taxes, the
company cannot later claim exemption if the law says
otherwise.

Conclusion
The doctrine of estoppel under BSA 2023 (Sections 121-123)
prevents individuals from changing their statements or actions to
mislead others. It ensures fairness and protects individuals who
rely on promises, representations, or conduct.
Understanding different types of estoppel is essential for lawyers, as
it applies to contracts, property disputes, tenancy, government
policies, and litigation. Courts have consistently upheld the
principle of estoppel to ensure justice.

Question 3: Expert Opinion and Its Relevance

Introduction
In legal proceedings, facts are often technical, scientific, or beyond
the understanding of judges and lawyers. In such cases, the opinion
of an expert plays a crucial role in assisting the court in reaching a
just decision. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023)
recognizes expert opinion under Sections 40 to 50, specifying when
the opinion of a third person (expert) becomes relevant.
Experts provide opinions in fields such as medicine, handwriting,
DNA analysis, forensics, and ballistics to help courts decide on
technical matters.

Who is an Expert?
Definition of Expert /Section 40, BSA 2023)
An expert is a person who has specialized knowledge, skill,
experience, or training in a particular field and is recognized by the
court to give an opinion on matters requiring technical analysis.
Section/45:
"When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law,
science, art, handwriting, finger impressions, or electronic evidence,
the opinions of persons specially skilled in such fields are relevant
facts."
Characteristics of an Expert
1. Specialized Knowledge – Must have expertise in a particular
field.
2. Experience or Qualification – Should be recognized for their
knowledge.
3. Independent and Unbiased – Should not favor any party.
4. Scientific or Technical Analysis – Opinion should be based on
tested principles.
Example:
A forensic expert examines a blood sample at a crime scene
and provides a scientific opinion on whether it matches the
accused's DNA.

When Does the Opinion of a Third Person Become

Relevant?
The general rule of evidence is that opinions are not admissible in
court. However, expert opinion is an exception because it helps the
judge understand technical facts.
Situations Where Expert Opinion is Relevant
1. Foreign Law – When a legal issue involves a foreign country,
experts in that country’s law can testify.
2. Science or Art – Medical reports, forensic evidence, and
chemical analysis fall under this category.
3. Handwriting Experts – Used in cases of forged signatures or
disputed documents.
4. Fingerprints and DNA Tests – Used in criminal investigations for
identification.
5. Electronic Evidence Analysis – Experts verify emails, CCTV
footage, and digital records.
Types of Expert Opinions Recognized by Law
1. Medical Expert Opinion
Used in cases involving injuries, cause of death, or mental
condition.
Doctors provide reports on whether an injury was caused by
accident or assault.
Case Law: Jakki @ Selvaraj v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007)
The Supreme Court held that medical expert opinion is relevant
but not conclusive. The court must verify its reliability.
2. Handwriting and Signature Analysis Used in cases of forgery,
disputed signatures, and fraud.
The expert compares the disputed signature with the admitted
signature.
Case Law: Murari Lal v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1980)
The Supreme Court ruled that handwriting expert opinion must
be supported by other evidence.
3. Fingerprint Analysis
Used in criminal investigations to match fingerprints found at a
crime scene with those of the accused.
Example:
A fingerprint expert confirms that the fingerprints on a murder
weapon match those of the suspect.
4. DNA and Forensic Reports (Section 49, BSA 2023)
Used in paternity disputes, rape cases, and criminal
investigations.
DNA evidence is considered highly reliable and scientific.
Case Law: Govind Singh v. State of Maharashtra (2005)
The Supreme Court held that DNA evidence is conclusive if
properly collected and tested.
5. Electronic and Digital Evidence
Experts analyze emails, CCTV footage, and phone records.
IT experts verify whether evidence has been tampered with.
Example:
A cyber expert testifies whether a WhatsApp message was
altered or if an email was genuinely sent by the accused.

Limitations of Expert Opinion

While expert opinions are helpful, they are not always conclusive.
Courts must analyze their reliability before accepting them.
Challenges in Expert Opinion
1. Conflicting Expert Views – Different experts may have different
conclusions.
2. Possibility of Bias – Experts may favor the party that hired
them.
3. Errors in Analysis – Mistakes in forensic tests can lead to wrong
conclusions.
4. Judicial Scrutiny is Necessary – Courts must verify and cross-
examine expert reports.
Case Law: Ram Narain v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1973)
 The Supreme Court ruled that expert opinion is advisory, not
binding, and must be evaluated with other evidence.

Case Laws on Expert Opinion

1. State of Haryana v. Bhagirath (1999)
 The court held that medical reports are relevant but require
judicial assessment before acceptance.
2. Malay Kumar Ganguly v. Dr. Sukumar Mukherjee (2010)
 The Supreme Court accepted expert evidence in a medical
negligence case, but emphasized that it should be supported by
facts.
3. Mohd. Aman v. State of Rajasthan (1997)
 DNA evidence was used to identify the rapist in a sexual assault
case.

Conclusion
Expert opinion plays a critical role in modern legal systems,
especially in criminal cases, civil disputes, and digital forensics.
The BSA 2023 U/Sections 40 to 50 clearly defines when and how
expert opinions become relevant. However, courts must ensure expert
neutrality, reliability, and scientific accuracy before relying on
such opinions.

Question 4: Oral Evidence and the Hearsay Rule

Introduction
Oral evidence plays a crucial role in the judicial process, as most facts
in a case are established through witness testimony. The Bharatiya
Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023), recognizes oral evidence
under Sections 54 and 55, which state that oral evidence must be
direct and not hearsay.
The hearsay rule ensures that only reliable and firsthand testimony
is considered in court. However, there are exceptions where hearsay
evidence is admissible.

1. Definition of Oral Evidence

Section 54 of BSA 2023 – What is Oral Evidence?
Oral evidence refers to statements made by witnesses in court
regarding facts they have personally perceived (seen, heard, or
experienced). It can be spoken words or gestures that convey
meaning.
Example:
 A person witnessing a murder and testifying about it in court is
giving oral evidence.
Section 54 of BSA 2023 – Oral Evidence Must Be Direct
Oral evidence must be given by the person who directly witnessed
the fact in question.
This means:
1. If it is about something seen → The person who saw it must
testify.
2. If it is about something heard → The person who heard it must
testify.
3. If it is about something felt (touch, smell, etc.) → The person
who experienced it must testify.
Example:
 If A saw B committing theft, only A’s testimony is direct
evidence.
 If A tells C about B’s theft, and C testifies, it is hearsay and
inadmissible.

2. The Rule: Oral Evidence Must Be Direct

The principle that oral evidence must be direct ensures that only
trustworthy and first-hand information is used in court.
Reasons for the Rule:
 Prevents false or manipulated evidence
 Ensures accuracy – First-hand evidence is more reliable than
second-hand accounts.
 Allows cross-examination – The opposing party can question
the direct witness.
Case Law: Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan (1952)
 The Supreme Court held that oral evidence must be direct and
credible. If a witness testifies about something they did not
personally see or hear, it is not admissible.
3. Hearsay Evidence and Its Inadmissibility
What is Hearsay?
Hearsay is a statement made outside of court that is repeated by
someone else in court. It is considered unreliable because:
1. The original speaker is not present for cross-examination.
2. The testimony is not firsthand knowledge.
Example of Hearsay:
 X tells Y that Z committed a crime. If Y testifies about what X
said, it is hearsay and not admissible.
Why is Hearsay Evidence Not Admissible?
 The person making the original statement may have lied.
 There is no way to verify accuracy without direct testimony.
 It violates the right to cross-examine the real witness.

Case Law: Bhugdomal Gangaram v. State of Gujarat (1983)

 The Supreme Court ruled that hearsay evidence is inadmissible
unless it falls under an exception.

4. Exceptions to the Hearsay Rule

There are specific situations where hearsay evidence is admissible
under BSA 2023:
1. Dying Declaration
 A statement made by a person before dying, regarding the
cause of death.
 Based on the principle that a person on their deathbed will not
lie.
Case Law: Pakala Narayan Swamy v. Emperor (1939)
 The Privy Council ruled that a dying declaration is admissible if
it relates to the cause of death.
2. Statements Against Interest
If a person makes a statement against their own financial or
legal interest, it is admissible.
Example:
A debtor admits he owes money before dying. This statement is
admissible.
3. Res Gestae – Statements Made During the Incident
Statements made spontaneously during an event are
admissible.
Example:
A person shouting “He has stabbed me!” during an attack is
admissible evidence.
Case Law: Ratten v. The Queen (1972)
A woman’s last words in a phone call during an attack were
admissible as res gestae evidence.
4. Public Documents and Government Records (Section 74)
Official records, government documents, and historical facts are
admissible as hearsay exceptions.
5. Statements in Books, Maps, and Reports (Section 35)
Information from books, maps, or published reports by experts
is admissible.
Example:
A scientist’s book on DNA evidence can be used in court.

5. Oral Evidence vs. Documentary Evidence

Case Law: State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai (2003)
The Supreme Court ruled that video conference testimony is
admissible as oral evidence.

6. Case Laws on Oral and Hearsay Evidence

1. Subramaniam v. Public Prosecutor (1956)
Defined hearsay as a statement made by a person not called as
a witness.
2. Teper v. The Queen (1952)
Held that hearsay is inadmissible because it cannot be tested
by cross-examination.
3. Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar (1998)
Reaffirmed that oral evidence must be direct and reliable.

7. Conclusion
Oral evidence is essential in legal proceedings but must be direct
and firsthand. The hearsay rule ensures that courts only rely on
trustworthy statements. However, exceptions exist where hearsay is
admissible, such as dying declarations, res gestae, and public
records.

Question 5: Documentary Evidence and Admissibility of

Electronic Records
Introduction
In legal proceedings, evidence is broadly classified into oral and
documentary evidence. While oral evidence consists of witness
testimony, documentary evidence includes written records, digital
documents, and other recorded materials.
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023) lays down
the rules for documentary evidence under Sections 56 to 73. It also
includes electronic records as admissible evidence which deal with
the conditions for their authenticity and admissibility in court.

1. What is Documentary Evidence?

Definition of Documentary Evidence
 Any information recorded in a tangible form, such as writing,
printing, or electronic storage.
 It includes papers, contracts, agreements, maps, official
records, and digital files.
Example:
 A registered sale deed proving land ownership.
  A CCTV recording of a crime.
Types of Documentary Evidence (Sections 59-60, BSA 2023)
Documentary evidence is classified into:
1. Primary Evidence -Section 59
o The original document itself.
o Always preferred over secondary evidence.
o Example: The original contract signed by both parties.

2. Secondary Evidence -Section 60

o Copies or reproductions of the original document.
o Admissible only when primary evidence is unavailable.
o Example: A certified photocopy of a sale deed if the
original is lost.

2. Admissibility of Documentary Evidence

For a document to be admissible, it must be:
Relevant to the case (Section 5, BSA 2023).
Authenticated and verified (Section 67).
Not altered or tampered with.
Proof of Documents by Primary Evidence
 The best proof of a document is the original itself.
When Secondary Evidence is Admissible
If the original is:
1. Lost or destroyed.
2. In possession of the opponent and they refuse to produce it.
3. A public record (certified copies can be used).
Case Law: Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994)
 The Supreme Court ruled that secondary evidence is
admissible only when conditions under Section 65 are
satisfied.
3. Admissibility of Electronic Records in Court
With technological advancements, electronic evidence like emails,
WhatsApp chats, CCTV footage, computer records, and mobile
call logs have become crucial in legal proceedings.
Section 61 – Special Provisions for Electronic Evidence
 Electronic records are considered documentary evidence.
 They must be proven.
Section 62 – Conditions for Admissibility of Electronic Records
For electronic records to be admissible, they must satisfy:
1. The record was produced by a reliable computer system.
2. The system was operating properly when the record was
created.
3. The information has not been altered.
4. A certificate under Section 65B(4) is submitted, signed by a
responsible officer confirming authenticity.
Example:
 To submit a WhatsApp chat as evidence, the party must
provide a certificate under Section 65B stating that the
messages were not manipulated.
Case Law: Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)
 The Supreme Court ruled that electronic records are
inadmissible without a Section 65B certificate.

4. Public and Private Documents

Section 74 – Public Documents
 Documents created by government authorities.
 Examples: Birth certificates, land records, court judgments.
 Admissible without further proof if certified.
Section 75 – Private Documents
 Created by individuals or private entities.
 Examples: Contracts, wills, business agreements.
 Require proof of authenticity before admission in court.
Case Law: State of Bihar v. Radha Krishna Singh (1983)
 Public documents are self-authenticating, but private
documents require further proof.

5. Comparison: Documentary vs. Electronic Evidence

6. Case Laws on Documentary and Electronic Evidence

1. Tomaso Bruno v. State of U.P. (2015)
 The Supreme Court held that CCTV footage is admissible.
2. Shafhi Mohammad v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018)
 If a certificate is not available, electronic evidence may still be
considered with additional proof.
3. Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal (2020)
 Reaffirmed that a certificate is mandatory unless the original
device is produced.

7. Conclusion
Documentary evidence is essential in legal proceedings and must be
properly authenticated before being admitted in court. The BSA
2023 recognizes electronic records as documentary evidence but
mandates strict conditions to prevent tampering. Courts strictly
follow these rules to ensure the reliability of digital evidence.

Question 6: Examination of Witnesses – Law and

Analysis
Introduction
A witness is a person who gives testimony under oath in a legal
proceeding. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023)
provides detailed provisions on the examination of witnesses under
Sections 140 to 164.
Proper examination of witnesses is necessary for uncovering the
truth, proving facts, and ensuring justice. The credibility of
evidence depends on how well a witness is examined and cross-
examined.

1. Who is a Witness?
Definition of a Witness
A witness is any person who:
Has direct or indirect knowledge of facts related to a case.
Can testify based on personal experience, observation, or
expertise.
Types of Witnesses
1. Eyewitness – Saw the event happen.
2. Expert Witness – Provides scientific, medical, or technical
opinions (e.g., doctors, forensic experts).
3. Hostile Witness – Changes their statement in court.
4. Accomplice Witness – Participated in the crime but testifies for
the prosecution.
5. Child Witness – A minor who gives testimony (must understand
the nature of truth).
Example:
A doctor giving testimony in a murder case about the cause of
death is an expert witness.
A neighbor who saw a theft happening is an eyewitness.

2. Law Relating to Examination of Witnesses

Witness examination is conducted in three stages:
1. Examination-in-chief - section 143
2. Cross-examination- Section 144
3. Re-examination- Section 145
(A) Examination-in-Chief
 The party calling the witness asks questions first.
 Purpose: To present the witness’s direct knowledge of the
case.
  Must be relevant to the facts in issue.
Example:
 In a murder trial, the prosecution’s witness describes what
they saw at the crime scene.
Case Law: Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan (1952)
 The Supreme Court held that a witness’s statement in
examination-in-chief must be given full weight unless
contradicted in cross-examination.

(B) Cross-Examination
 Conducted by the Advocate of opposing party.
 Purpose: To test the truthfulness of the witness.
 The lawyer can question credibility, previous statements, and
motives.
Example:
 If a witness claims to have seen the accused at 10 PM, cross-
examination may ask, "Was there enough light to see clearly?"
Key Rules of Cross-Examination
Only questions related to the case are allowed.
Leading questions can be asked (e.g., "Isn't it true that you were not
present at the crime scene?").
Witness can be contradicted with prior statements.
Case Law: State of U.P. v. Ramesh Prasad Misra (1996)
The Supreme Court ruled that cross-examination is essential
for fair trial and testing the reliability of witnesses.

(C) Re-Examination
Done by the party who first called the witness.
Purpose: To clarify doubts raised in cross-examination.
New facts cannot be introduced.
Example:
If a witness was confused in cross-examination, re-examination
can ask for clarification.
Case Law: Binay Kumar Singh v. State of Bihar (1997)
The Supreme Court held that re-examination should only
clarify doubts raised in cross-examination.

3. Competency and Incompetency of Witnesses

Competent Witnesses
All persons are competent unless proved otherwise.
Even a child, mentally ill person, or elderly person can be a
witness if they understand the importance of truth.
Incompetent Witnesses
1. A person who cannot understand questions due to mental
incapacity.
2. A witness influenced by threats or bribes.
3. Spouse of the accused
Case Law: Dhanraj v. State of Maharashtra (2002)
The court ruled that a child witness’s testimony is admissible if
they understand the importance of truth.

4. Examination of Special Types of Witnesses

(A) Examination of Child Witness
A child witness can testify if they can understand and answer
questions.
The court must determine their intelligence before recording
the statement.
Case Law: Ratansinh Dalsukhbhai Nayak v. State of Gujarat
(2004)
 A child witness’s evidence was accepted because the child
understood the difference between truth and lies.
(B) Examination of Accomplice Witness
An accomplice (co-accused) can be a witness for the
prosecution.
Courts usually require corroboration before convicting based
on an accomplice's testimony.
Case Law: Bhuboni Sahu v. King (1949)
The court held that accomplice testimony should be supported
by independent evidence.

5. Hostile Witness
A witness who changes their statement in court is called a hostile
witness.
The court may allow cross-examination of its own witness.
Example: A witness first says they saw the murder but later
denies it.
Case Law: Sat Paul v. Delhi Administration (1976)
The Supreme Court ruled that hostile witnesses should not be
completely disregarded, but their testimony must be
examined carefully.

6. Leading Questions- Section 146

Questions suggesting an answer are called leading questions.
Allowed in cross-examination but not in examination-in-chief.
Example:
"The accused was wearing a black shirt, right?" (Leading question)
"What was the accused wearing?" (Proper question)
Case Law: Bawa Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab (1963)
The court held that leading questions are only permitted in
cross-examination.

7. Refreshing Memory (Section/162}

A witness can refer to notes or records if they forget details.
 Allowed if the document was made at the time of the event.
Example:
A police officer checking his case diary before testifying.
Case Law: Queen Empress v. Abdullah (1885)
The court ruled that a witness can refresh memory using past
records if they are reliable.

8. Importance of Witness Examination in Legal

Proceedings
Ensures fair trial – Helps courts determine the truth.
Prevents false evidence – Cross-examination helps in identifying
lies, inconsistencies.
Affects case outcome – A strong witness examination can win or
lose a case.

9. Conclusion
The examination of witnesses is a critical process in the legal system.
The BSA 2023 provides detailed guidelines on how witnesses
should be examined to ensure justice. Cross-examination is
particularly important for testing credibility, and courts carefully
analyze witness testimony before making decisions.

Question 7: Direct Evidence vs. Circumstantial Evidence

Introduction
In the legal system, evidence plays a crucial role in proving or
disproving facts in a case. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
(BSA 2023) defines evidence and its types. Broadly, evidence is
classified into Direct Evidence and Circumstantial Evidence.
Understanding the difference between these two types of evidence
is important in legal proceedings, as courts often rely on a
combination of both to reach a verdict.
1. Meaning of Evidence
Definition of Evidence (Section 2, BSA 2023)
Evidence includes:
1. Oral Evidence – Statements made by witnesses.
2. Documentary Evidence – Records, contracts, letters, electronic
records, etc.
Types of Evidence
Primary Evidence – The original document or object.
Secondary Evidence – Copies or reproductions of the original.
Direct Evidence – Proves a fact directly without needing
inference.
Circumstantial Evidence – Requires reasoning to connect it to
the fact in question.

2. What is Direct Evidence?

Definition
Direct evidence proves a fact directly without requiring any
assumption or inference.
Examples of Direct Evidence
Eyewitness Testimony – A person saw the crime happening.
Video Footage – CCTV recording showing the accused
committing the crime.
Confession – The accused admitting the crime.
DNA or Fingerprint Match – Directly linking the accused to the
crime.
Characteristics of Direct Evidence
Strongest form of evidence.
Does not require interpretation or inference.
If believed, it is sufficient to convict or acquit the accused.
Example:
 If a person sees A stabbing B and testifies in court, this is direct
evidence of the crime.
Case Law: State of U.P. v. Naresh (2011)
The Supreme Court held that if an eyewitness's testimony is
trustworthy, no further proof is needed.

3. What is Circumstantial Evidence?

Definition
Circumstantial evidence does not directly prove a fact but helps
establish it through inference.
Examples of Circumstantial Evidence
Motive and Opportunity – The accused had a reason to commit the
crime.
Last Seen Theory – The accused was last seen with the victim.
Bloodstains on Clothes – Found on the accused but no direct
eyewitness.
Call Records – Show the accused was in the crime location.
Characteristics of Circumstantial Evidence
Requires reasoning and inference.
Can be strong if multiple facts create a logical chain.
Often used when direct evidence is unavailable.
Example:
A person is found dead, and the accused’s fingerprints,
bloodstains, and location data place him at the crime scene.
These clues together form circumstantial evidence.
Case Law: Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra
(1984)
The Supreme Court laid down five golden principles for using
circumstantial evidence.
4. Five Golden Principles of Circumstantial Evidence
(Sharad Sarda Case)
1. All facts must be proven – Each fact must be established
beyond doubt.
2. Facts must be connected – They must lead to one logical
conclusion.
3. No alternative explanation – The evidence must only point to
the accused’s guilt.
4. Evidence must prove guilt beyond doubt – There should be no
room for other possibilities.
5. Facts must exclude all innocence – The chain must lead only to
the accused's involvement.
If these conditions are satisfied, circumstantial evidence can be as
strong as direct evidence.

5. Key Differences Between Direct and Circumstantial

Evidence

6. Importance of Circumstantial Evidence in Criminal

Cases
In many cases, direct evidence is unavailable (e.g., no
eyewitnesses).
Circumstantial evidence helps establish the crime logically.
Courts have convicted accused persons based solely on strong
circumstantial evidence.
Case Law: Anwar Ali v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2020)
The Supreme Court ruled that a chain of circumstantial
evidence can be stronger than direct evidence if it leaves no
doubt.

7. When is Circumstantial Evidence More Reliable?

If multiple facts create a strong chain of events.
When direct evidence is weak or unreliable.
 When scientific evidence (DNA, forensics, etc.) supports the
claim.
Example:
In terrorist attacks, forensic reports, call logs, and financial
transactions often form a strong circumstantial case.

8. Conclusion
Both direct and circumstantial evidence are important in law.
Direct evidence is straightforward and powerful.
Circumstantial evidence is indirect but can be equally strong if
it logically proves guilt.
Courts rely on both types of evidence to ensure justice is served. If
circumstantial evidence follows the five golden principles, it can
convict an accused just like direct evidence.

Question 8: What is Dying Declaration and What is its

Evidentiary Value?
Introduction
A dying declaration is a statement made by a person who is on the
verge of death, regarding the cause or circumstances of their
impending death. This type of evidence holds great significance in
criminal law, as the person making the statement is considered to
have no reason to lie. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
(BSA 2023) recognizes dying declarations as an exception to the
general rule that hearsay evidence is not admissible.
The principle behind dying declarations is based on the Latin maxim:
"Nemo moriturus praesumitur mentiri" – A person who is about
to die is presumed not to lie.
1. Meaning and Definition of Dying Declaration
Definition under BSA 2023 (Section 3)
Section 26 states that a statement made by a person as to the cause of
their death or circumstances leading to their death is admissible as
evidence in court if the person dies after making it.
Essentials of a Dying Declaration
The person making the statement must be dead – The statement is
only used after the death of the declarant.
The statement must relate to the cause of death – It should
describe how the person was injured or killed.
The person must be in a fit state to speak – The declarant must be
mentally sound when making the statement.
It can be recorded by various persons – A Magistrate, doctor,
police officer, or any reliable witness can record it.

2. Forms of Dying Declaration

A dying declaration can be given in different forms:
Oral – Spoken to a doctor, police officer, or relative.
Written – If the injured person writes down their statement.
Gestures and Signs – If a person is unable to speak but indicates
answers using signs.
Case Law: Queen-Empress v. Abdullah (1885)
The court held that even gestures (like nodding or blinking)
can be considered a dying declaration if properly recorded.

3. Evidentiary Value of a Dying Declaration

The Supreme Court has established certain principles to determine the
reliability of a dying declaration.
When Dying Declaration is Considered Strong Evidence
If it is recorded by a Magistrate.
If the declarant was conscious and mentally stable at the time.
If it is clear, consistent, and without contradictions.
Case Law: Laxman v. State of Maharashtra (2002)
  The Supreme Court ruled that a dying declaration does not
need to be recorded by a Magistrate to be valid. However, if
recorded by a doctor or police officer, they must ensure the
person was in a fit mental state.

When Dying Declaration is Considered Weak Evidence

If there are multiple dying declarations with contradictions.
If the declarant was not in a stable mental condition while making
it.
If there is a possibility of tutoring, prompting, or influence.
Case Law: Kushal Rao v. State of Bombay (1958)
The Supreme Court ruled that courts should carefully examine
the facts and circumstances before accepting a dying
declaration as sole evidence.

4. Who Can Record a Dying Declaration?

A dying declaration can be recorded by:
A Magistrate (most preferred).
A Doctor if the Magistrate is unavailable.
A Police Officer if no other authority is present.
Any reliable witness in exceptional cases.
Case Law: Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar (1998)
The Supreme Court ruled that a dying declaration cannot be
rejected simply because it was recorded by a police officer,
but the court must scrutinize it carefully.

5. Can a Conviction Be Based Solely on a Dying

Declaration?
Yes, if the dying declaration is reliable and free from doubt, it
can be the sole basis for conviction.
However, if there are contradictions or doubts, courts look for
corroborating evidence.
Case Law: State of U.P. v. Ramesh Prasad (2005)
 The Supreme Court ruled that if a dying declaration is
consistent, truthful, and recorded properly, it is sufficient to
convict the accused.

6. Exceptions: When a Dying Declaration is NOT

Admissible
If the declarant survives after making the statement.
If the statement is vague or unclear.
If there is evidence of tutoring or coercion.
Example:
 A person who survives after making a dying declaration cannot
be used as evidence, as they are now available for cross-
examination.

7. Key Differences Between Dying Declaration and

Other Statements

8. Conclusion
A dying declaration is an important piece of evidence in criminal
trials, especially in murder and homicide cases. While courts accept
it even without cross-examination, they carefully examine its
reliability, consistency, and authenticity before basing a conviction
solely on it.
If recorded properly and without contradictions, a dying
declaration can be the sole basis for conviction. However, if there
are doubts about its accuracy, courts require additional evidence.

Question 9: Define Evidence and Explain Its Different

Types
Introduction
The term "evidence" plays a crucial role in the judicial system as it
helps courts determine the truth and deliver justice. The Bharatiya
Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023) defines evidence and lays
down rules regarding its admissibility and classification. Evidence can
be oral, documentary, electronic, or circumstantial, and each type
has its own significance in legal proceedings.
In this answer, we will define evidence under BSA 2023, discuss its
types, and explain its evidentiary value with relevant case laws.

1. Definition of Evidence
Section 2(i) of BSA 2023 - Definition of Evidence
According to Section 2(i) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,
2023, evidence means and includes:
1. Oral Evidence – Statements made before the court by
witnesses.
2. Documentary Evidence – Documents, including electronic
records, produced before the court.
Explanation of the Definition
Evidence helps prove or disprove a fact in a case.
It can be spoken, written, or in electronic form.
Oral evidence requires a witness to testify in court.
Documentary and electronic evidence provide written or recorded
proof of facts.
Case Law: Satbir v. State of Haryana (2021)
The Supreme Court ruled that evidence must be relevant,
admissible, and credible to be accepted by the court.

2. Types of Evidence
Evidence can be classified into several types based on its nature and
admissibility.
(A) Oral Evidence (Section 59 & 60, BSA 2023)
Statements made by witnesses in court under oath.
Must be direct and not hearsay.
Example: A person who saw a crime happening testifies about it.
Case Law: Ram Prakash v. State of U.P. (1976)
  The court ruled that oral evidence must be direct and
supported by other evidence if needed.

(B) Documentary Evidence (Section 61-66, BSA 2023)

Written documents, records, contracts, reports, or other papers
submitted in court.
Includes printed, written, or signed materials.
Example: A sale deed presented in a property dispute case.
Case Law: Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab (2002)
 The Supreme Court stated that documentary evidence is
stronger than oral evidence when properly proved.

(C) Electronic Evidence (Section 62, BSA 2023)

Data stored in computers, emails, CCTV footage, WhatsApp
messages, digital contracts, etc.
Admissibility requires authentication and proper certification (Sec
BSA,2023).
Example: A CCTV recording showing the accused at the crime
scene.
Case Law: Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)
 The Supreme Court held that electronic evidence must be
certified under Section 65B for admissibility.

(D) Direct Evidence

Clear and conclusive proof of a fact without needing inference.
Example: A person witnessing a murder and testifying about it.
Case Law: Kansa Behera v. State of Orissa (1987)
 The Supreme Court ruled that direct evidence is the best
evidence if credible.
(E) Circumstantial Evidence
Indirect evidence that helps prove a fact by linking circumstances.
Requires the court to draw logical conclusions from facts.
Example: Finding the accused’s fingerprints on a murder weapon.
Case Law: Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra
(1984)
The Supreme Court laid down five conditions for relying on
circumstantial evidence, including proving guilt beyond
reasonable doubt.

(F) Primary Evidence (Section 61, BSA 2023)

Original documents or records presented before the court.
Example: The original copy of a contract.
Case Law: Hira Devi v. Official Assignee of Bombay (1958)
The Supreme Court ruled that primary evidence must be
preferred over secondary evidence.

(G) Secondary Evidence (Section 62, BSA 2023)

Copies or substitutes of original documents.
Admissible only if primary evidence is unavailable due to valid
reasons.
Example: A certified photocopy of a lost sale deed.
Case Law: State of Rajasthan v. Khemraj (2000)
 The court ruled that secondary evidence must meet legal
requirements for admissibility.

(H) Hearsay Evidence (Not Admissible)

Evidence based on what someone else heard.
Not admissible in court unless it falls under exceptions.
Example: A person saying, “I heard from someone that X committed
the crime.”
Case Law: Teper v. R (1952)
  The Privy Council ruled that hearsay evidence is unreliable and
should not be accepted unless it meets exceptions like dying
declarations.

(I) Expert Evidence (Section 45, BSA 2023)

Opinion of a specialist in a field like medical, forensic, or
handwriting analysis.
Example: A forensic expert confirming whether a bullet was fired
from a specific gun.
Case Law: State of H.P. v. Jai Lal (1999)
 The Supreme Court held that expert opinions must be based
on sound reasoning and scientific principles.

(J) Confessional Evidence

Statement made by the accused admitting guilt.
Must be voluntary to be admissible.
Example: A confession given before a magistrate.
Case Law: Pakala Narayan Swami v. Emperor (1939)
 The Privy Council ruled that only voluntary confessions are
admissible.

(K) Judicial and Non-Judicial Evidence

Judicial Evidence – Evidence recorded in court proceedings.
Non-Judicial Evidence – Evidence collected outside court, such as
police interrogations.

3. Evidentiary Value of Different Types of Evidence

4. Conclusion
Evidence is the foundation of any judicial proceeding. The
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, provides a clear legal
framework for different types of evidence and their admissibility.
Direct and documentary evidence are the strongest forms.
Circumstantial evidence must be carefully examined.
Electronic evidence is admissible but requires certification.
Hearsay evidence is not allowed unless it meets exceptions.

Question 10: Explain the Theory of Relevancy under the

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Introduction
The Theory of Relevancy determines which facts can be considered
by the court to prove or disprove a case. In legal proceedings, not all
facts are admissible; only those relevant to the matter in issue are
allowed.
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023), under
Chapter II (Sections 5 to 16), lays down the rules regarding
relevancy of facts. The courts must decide whether a fact is relevant
before determining its admissibility.
In this answer, we will explain:

Meaning of relevancy
Difference between relevancy and admissibility
Types of relevant facts under BSA 2023
Case laws supporting the theory of relevancy

1. Meaning of Relevancy
Definition under Section 5, BSA 2023
Only relevant facts can be proved in court.
The court will not consider irrelevant facts even if they seem
important.
Illustration
In a murder trial, the fact that the accused threatened the
victim before the incident is relevant.
 However, the accused’s bad character in general is not relevant
unless character is in issue.
Case Law: R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra (1973)
The Supreme Court held that only facts that are logically
connected to the issue are relevant.

2. Difference Between Relevancy and Admissibility

Case Law: Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar (1998)
The Supreme Court held that admissibility is decided by law,
while relevancy is decided by logic.

3. Types of Relevant Facts under BSA 2023

The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Sections 5-16) provides
various types of relevant facts, which can be classified as follows:
(A) Facts Forming Part of the Same Transaction (Section 6 – Res
Gestae Rule)
Statements or actions that occurred at the time of the incident are
relevant.
These facts are part of the chain of events leading to the main issue.
Example: A person shouting “He stabbed me!” immediately after
being attacked.
Case Law: Ratten v. R (1972)
The court ruled that statements made in the heat of the
moment are admissible as part of Res Gestae.

(B) Facts Showing Motive, Preparation, or Conduct

Motive (why a person committed a crime) is relevant.
Preparation (steps taken before committing the act) is relevant.
Conduct (behavior of the accused before or after the act) is relevant.
Example:
A person buying poison before a murder shows preparation.
 Running away after a crime shows guilty conduct.
Case Law: Sudhir Kumar Mukherjee v. State of W.B. (1973)
The court held that motive strengthens the prosecution’s case
but is not always necessary.

(C) Facts Necessary to Explain or Introduce Evidence (Section 9)

Facts that explain previous evidence are relevant.
Example:
The identity of an accused in CCTV footage can be explained by
a witness who saw him at the scene.

(D) Facts Relating to Confessions (Section 24-30, BSA 2023)

Confessions made voluntarily are relevant.
Confessions obtained by force, inducement, or threats are
irrelevant.
Case Law: Pakala Narayan Swami v. Emperor (1939)
The Privy Council ruled that a confession must be voluntary to be
relevant.

(E) Facts Relating to Dying Declarations (Section 32(1), BSA 2023)

A statement made by a person before death regarding the cause of
death is relevant.
Example: A victim saying, “X shot me” before dying is relevant
evidence.
Case Law: Laxman v. State of Maharashtra (2002)
The Supreme Court held that dying declarations are relevant
and can be the sole basis for conviction.

(F) Facts Relating to Opinion of Experts (Section 45, BSA 2023)

Opinions of medical, forensic, and handwriting experts are
relevant.
Example: A forensic expert testifying that a bullet came from the
accused’s gun.
Case Law: State of H.P. v. Jai Lal (1999)
The Supreme Court ruled that expert evidence must be based
on scientific reasoning.

(G) Facts Relating to Character Sections 46 to 50

To Character evidence is generally not relevant, except in cases
where it directly affects the issue.
Example:
In a defamation case, the plaintiff’s character is relevant.
Case Law: Govinda Reddy v. State of Mysore (1960)
The court ruled that bad character alone cannot prove guilt
unless character itself is in issue.

4. Importance of the Theory of Relevancy

Helps courts decide what facts can be considered.
Prevents waste of time by excluding unnecessary facts.
Ensures only logical and legally valid facts are used.
Improves fairness in legal proceedings.

5. Conclusion
The Theory of Relevancy is the foundation of evidence law under
the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. It ensures that only facts
logically connected to the case are admitted in court.
Relevancy is based on logic and necessity.
Admissibility is based on legal provisions.
Sections 5-16, BSA 2023 define which facts are relevant.
Courts must carefully apply relevancy rules to ensure justice.
By understanding which facts are relevant, courts can deliver fair
and efficient justice.
Question 11: Explain in Detail Different Presumptions as
to Documents Under Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,
2023
Introduction
The law of evidence recognizes that certain documents carry a
presumption of authenticity and correctness. These legal
presumptions help the courts save time and ensure efficiency in
judicial proceedings.
Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023),
various presumptions are laid down in Sections 79 to 93, covering:
Presumptions as to certified copies of documents
Presumptions as to public and private documents
Presumptions regarding electronic records
This answer will discuss the meaning, types, and legal provisions
related to presumptions as to documents.

1. Meaning of Presumption in Law

A presumption is a legal inference that a court accepts as true
unless proved otherwise.
Rebuttable Presumption – Can be disproved with evidence.
Irrebuttable Presumption – Cannot be disproved even with
evidence.
Example:
 A government-issued birth certificate is presumed correct
unless proved otherwise.
 A court will presume that an official government document is
genuine unless challenged.
Case Law: State of Maharashtra v. Narsingrao Gangaram Pimple
(1984)
The Supreme Court held that presumptions under evidence
law help reduce unnecessary burdens on courts.
2. Types of Presumptions as to Documents Under BSA
2023
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 lays down various
presumptions regarding documents, categorized as follows:
(A) Presumption as to Certified Copies of Documents (Section 79, BSA
2023)
If a certified copy of a document is produced from a lawful
authority, it is presumed to be genuine.
This applies to certified copies issued by courts, government
offices, and notaries.
Example: A certified copy of a sale deed from the Sub-
Registrar’s office is presumed genuine unless challenged.
Case Law: Surendra Kumar v. State of U.P. (1955)
 A certified copy of a judgment was held admissible without
requiring further proof.

(B) Presumption as to Public Documents (Section 80, BSA 2023)

Documents that are part of official government records are
presumed to be correct and genuine.
This includes:
 Government orders
 Acts and regulations
 Judgments of courts

Example: A gazette notification announcing a new law is presumed

to be correct.
Case Law: Shyam Sundar v. State of Rajasthan (1974)
 The Supreme Court held that official government documents
carry a presumption of correctness unless rebutted.

(C) Presumption as to Private Documents (Section 81, BSA 2023)

Unlike public documents, private documents do not automatically
carry a presumption of correctness.
 A private document’s authenticity must be proved by the person
relying on it.
Example: A personal loan agreement between two individuals
must be proved with signatures and witnesses.
Case Law: P.C. Purushothama v. Perumal (1972)
The court ruled that private documents require proper proof
before being admitted as evidence.

(D) Presumption as to Electronic Records (Section 85, BSA 2023)

Digital documents such as emails, text messages, and scanned
copies are presumed to be genuine if certified under the Information
Technology Act, 2000.
The court presumes that electronic records maintained by
government offices are correct.
Example: A digitally signed contract is presumed valid unless
disputed.
Case Law: Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)
 The Supreme Court ruled that electronic evidence must be
accompanied by a certificate under Section 65B of the IT Act.

(E) Presumption as to Books, Maps, and Charts (Section 87, BSA

2023)
Books, maps, and charts published by government authorities are
presumed to be correct.
Example: A survey map issued by the Land Records Department
is presumed accurate unless proved otherwise.
Case Law: Bhagat Ram v. State of Punjab (1954)
The court ruled that maps prepared by government authorities
carry a presumption of correctness.

(F) Presumption as to Telegraphic and Electronic Messages (Section

88, BSA 2023)
A message sent through telegram, email, or SMS is presumed to
be genuine if it was properly transmitted.
 Example: A bank email confirming a transaction is presumed
correct unless challenged.
Case Law: State v. Mohd. Afzal (2005)
The Delhi High Court held that emails and SMS are admissible
if their origin is proved.

(G) Presumption as to Documents in Proper Custody (Section 90, BSA

2023)
If a document is more than 20 years old and is found in proper
custody, it is presumed to be genuine.
Proper custody means keeping records where they are normally
expected to be stored.
Example: A 50-year-old land title deed kept in the government
record office is presumed authentic.
Case Law: Harihar Prasad v. Deonarain Prasad (1956)
 The Supreme Court ruled that ancient documents kept in
government records carry a presumption of authenticity.

3. Importance of Presumptions as to Documents

✔ Speeds up legal proceedings by avoiding unnecessary proof.
✔ Ensures authenticity of official and public records.
✔ Reduces burden on courts by accepting legally recognized
documents.
✔ Improves efficiency in handling electronic and digital records.

4. Conclusion
The presumption as to documents under Sections 79 to 90 of BSA
2023 plays a crucial role in the law of evidence.
✔ Certified copies and public records are presumed correct.
Electronic records are presumed genuine with proper
certification.
Private documents require proof unless found in proper custody
for 20+ years.
 Government-published books, maps, and charts carry a
presumption of correctness.
These presumptions ensure that official records are trusted while
allowing challenges where necessary.

Question 12: Explain in Detail the Exclusion of Oral

Evidence by Documentary Evidence under Bharatiya
Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Introduction
In legal proceedings, evidence can be in two forms:
1. Oral Evidence – Statements made by witnesses.
2. Documentary Evidence – Written or recorded materials.
The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023) follows the
"best evidence rule," which means:
When a fact is recorded in a document, the document itself is the
best evidence of that fact.
Oral evidence cannot contradict, vary, or modify written
documents, except in certain circumstances.
This principle is contained in Sections 94 and 95 of BSA 2023,
which govern the exclusion of oral evidence when documentary
evidence is available.

1. Section 94: Evidence of Terms of a Contract, Grant,

or Other Disposition of Property Reduced to Writing
Explanation of Section 94
When a contract, grant, or property transaction is in writing, the
written document itself must be produced in court.
Oral evidence cannot be used to contradict, add to, or modify the
written terms.
Illustrations of Section 94
If a lease agreement is written, its terms must be proved by
producing the lease document, not by oral statements.
 If a sale deed is executed, the transfer of property must be proved
by the document itself.
Exceptions to Section 91
Oral evidence is allowed:
If the original document is lost or destroyed (secondary evidence
can be given).
If a document is not required by law to be in writing.
If a public officer’s record is challenged for fraud or forgery.
Case Law: Roop Kumar v. Mohan Thedani (2003)
The Supreme Court ruled that oral evidence cannot alter the
terms of a written contract unless fraud, mistake, or illegality is
proven.

2. Section 95: Exclusion of Oral Evidence Against

Written Documents
Explanation of Section 95
If the terms of an agreement are recorded in writing, no oral evidence
can be given to change those terms.
No person can claim that an agreement had different terms than
what is written in the document.
Illustrations of Section 95
If a sale deed states that a house was sold for ₹10 lakh , no oral
evidence can be given to say it was actually sold for ₹12 lakh.
If a contract of employment is written, oral evidence cannot be
used to say the salary was different from what is written in the
contract.

3. Exceptions to Section 95
Even when a document is produced, oral evidence can be allowed in
certain situations, such as:
(i) Fraud, Mistake, or Illegality (Proviso 1, Section 92)
If a document was obtained by fraud, coercion, or undue influence,
oral evidence can be given to prove it.
 Case Law: Satya Brata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur & Co.
(1954)
The Supreme Court held that oral evidence can be admitted to
prove fraud in a written document.

(ii) Separate Oral Agreement (Proviso 2, Section 92)

If there was a separate oral agreement made before the written
document, oral evidence can be given.
Example: If a person signs a loan agreement but was verbally
promised a lower interest rate, the oral promise may be proved.

(iii) Condition Precedent to Operation of the Document (Proviso 3,

Section 95)
Oral evidence is allowed to prove a condition that had to be
fulfilled before the document became effective.
Example: If a person agrees to buy land only if a government
permit is obtained, oral evidence can be given to prove this
condition.
Case Law: Ishwar Dass v. Sohan Lal (2000)
The court held that oral evidence is admissible to prove
conditions that affect the validity of a written contract.

(iv) Explaining Ambiguous Documents (Proviso 6, Section 95)

If a document has unclear or ambiguous terms, oral evidence can
explain its meaning.
Example: If a will states that property is given to "my brother" but
the testator has two brothers, oral evidence can be used to identify
which brother was intended.
Case Law: Bai Hira Devi v. Official Assignee (1958)
The court ruled that when a document is unclear, oral
evidence can be given to clarify its meaning.
4. Special Provisions for Electronic Records
Electronic records are also considered documentary evidence
under the Information Technology Act, 2000.
If an agreement is made through emails or text messages, the
electronic record must be produced in court without relying on oral
statements.
Case Law: Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)
The Supreme Court ruled that electronic records must be
proved as per IT Act requirements, and oral evidence cannot
replace them.

5. Importance of Sections 94 and 95 in Legal

Proceedings
Ensures that documents are the primary source of evidence in
courts.
Prevents false oral statements from changing the meaning of written
agreements.
Protects parties from fraudulent claims based on oral promises.
Promotes certainty and reliability in contracts and transactions.

6. Conclusion
The exclusion of oral evidence by documentary evidence under
Sections 94 and 95 of BSA 2023 follows the principle that "when a
fact is recorded in writing, it must be proved by the document
itself".
Section 94 mandates that when a contract, grant, or disposition of
property is in writing, the written document must be presented in
court.
Section 95 further prevents oral evidence from contradicting or
altering the terms of a written document, with some exceptions like
fraud, ambiguity, or separate oral agreements.
These provisions ensure that legal agreements remain secure,
reliable, and free from false claims based on oral evidence.
Question 13: Different Types of Witnesses and Their
Evidential Value
Introduction
A witness plays a crucial role in judicial proceedings by providing
statements that help the court determine the truth. Under the
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023), the testimony of
a witness is a primary source of oral evidence. However, all
witnesses do not have the same evidentiary value. The credibility and
reliability of their statements depend on their nature, the manner of
examination, and the circumstances of the case.

1. Definition of a Witness
A witness is a person who provides evidence before the court
regarding facts within their knowledge.
Key Sections and their Relevance:
Witnesses (Sections 124-139):
 Section 124: Defines a competent witness as someone
who understands questions and can give rational answers.
 Section 125: Deals with witnesses who cannot
communicate verbally.
 Sections 126-139: Cover various aspects of witness
competency and privileges, including the competency of
spouses, judges, magistrates, and communications during
marriage, official communications, information about
offenses, professional communications, and more.

2. Classification of Witnesses
Witnesses can be categorized based on their nature, role, and
reliability.
(i) Eye Witness
An eye witness is a person who has seen the actual occurrence of
the event and provides a first-hand account of the incident.
Their testimony is considered direct evidence and is given
significant weight in court.
Example: A person who witnessed a murder and testifies about it in
court.
Case Law: State of U.P. v. Krishna Gopal (1988)
The Supreme Court held that an eye witness's testimony is
crucial, provided it is consistent and reliable.

(ii) Hearsay Witness

A hearsay witness does not have direct knowledge of the facts but
only heard about them from someone else.
Generally, hearsay evidence is inadmissible, except in special
circumstances (dying declaration, res gestae, etc.).
Example: A person who testifies that they were told about an
accident by someone else.
Case Law: Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan (1952)
 The court ruled that hearsay evidence cannot be the sole basis
of conviction unless it falls under an exception.

(iii) Expert Witness

Defined under Section 40 of BSA 2023.
An expert witness is someone with specialized knowledge in a
particular field whose opinion is relevant in court.
Examples:
 A doctor testifying about cause of death.
 A forensic expert explaining DNA evidence.
 A handwriting expert verifying a signature.

Case Law: State of Maharashtra v. Damu Gopinath Shinde

(2000)
 The Supreme Court relied on forensic expert testimony to
confirm the authenticity of evidence.

(iv) Child Witness

A child can be a witness if the court finds them capable of

understanding questions and giving rational answers.
 Courts must be cautious as children are easily influenced and may
not fully understand truthfulness.
Case Law: Nivrutti Pandurang Kokate v. State of Maharashtra
(2008)
The Supreme Court held that a child witness’s testimony must
be carefully scrutinized for reliability.

(v) Hostile Witness

A hostile witness is one who changes their statement in court,
going against the party that called them to testify.
The court may allow cross-examination of a hostile witness under
Section 154 of BSA 2023.
Example: A witness in a murder case initially supports the
prosecution but later denies seeing anything.
Case Law: Sat Pal v. Delhi Administration (1976)
The Supreme Court ruled that the testimony of a hostile
witness is not entirely disregarded but must be examined
carefully.

(vi) Accomplice Witness

Defined under Section 133 of BSA 2023.
An accomplice is a person who was involved in a crime but turns
witness for the prosecution.
Their testimony is admissible but must be corroborated by other
evidence.
Case Law: Sarwan Singh v. State of Punjab (1957)
The Supreme Court held that an accomplice’s statement must
be supported by independent evidence to be relied upon.

(vii) Interested Witness

A witness who has a personal interest in the case outcome, such as
relatives of a victim.
Courts consider their statements with caution and look for
corroboration.
Example: A murder victim’s brother testifying against the accused.
Case Law: State of Rajasthan v. Teja Ram (1999)
The Supreme Court ruled that merely being a relative does not
discredit a witness, but their testimony must be carefully
examined.

(viii) Character Witness

A character witness testifies about the moral and behavioral traits
of an accused person.
Their evidence is more relevant in civil cases than criminal cases.
Example: A teacher testifying about the good character of a student
accused of theft.
Case Law: M.C. Verghese v. T.J. Ponnan (1968)
The Supreme Court stated that character evidence is only
relevant in certain situations and must be approached
cautiously.

3. Evidentiary Value of Witnesses

The value of a witness’s testimony depends on:
Truthfulness and consistency – Courts check whether a witness’s
statement remains unchanged.
Corroboration – Independent evidence supporting the witness’s
statement increases its reliability.
Motive and interest – The court evaluates if the witness has a reason
to lie.
Cross-examination performance – If a witness withstands cross-
examination, their testimony gains more credibility.
Case Law: Vadivelu Thevar v. State of Madras (1957)
The Supreme Court classified witnesses into:
1. Wholly reliable – No need for corroboration.
2. Wholly unreliable – Must be discarded.
3. Partly reliable – Needs independent evidence for support.
4. Conclusion
Witnesses are essential in court proceedings, but their evidentiary
value varies based on their type, credibility, and consistency.
Eye witnesses and expert witnesses have high evidentiary value.
Hearsay witnesses and hostile witnesses require caution.
Accomplice witnesses need corroboration.
Courts carefully assess each witness’s reliability, motives, and
consistency to ensure justice is served.

Question 14: Examination-in-Chief and Cross-

Examination
Introduction
In a judicial proceeding, the examination of witnesses is a crucial
process that helps establish the facts of a case. Examination-in-chief
and cross-examination are two key stages in this process, governed
by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023). These
examinations ensure that the witness provides a clear, truthful, and
legally admissible statement before the court.

1. Relevant Sections Under BSA 2023

Examination of Witnesses (Sections 140-168):
 Section 140: Deals with witnesses to character.
 Section 142: Defines examination-in-chief, cross-
examination, and re-examination.
 Sections 143-144: Relate to the production and cross-
examination of document custodians.
 Section 145: Addresses cross-examination of character
witnesses.
 Sections 148, 150, 151: Cover cross-examination on
previous statements and when witnesses are compelled
to answer.
  Section 152: States that questions must be on reasonable
grounds.
 Sections 159, 160, 161: Discuss corroboration of
evidence.
 Section 168: Deals with statements made by witnesses in
court.

2. Examination-in-Chief
(i) Definition
Section 143 of BSA 2023 defines Examination-in-Chief as the
initial questioning of a witness by the party who called them to
testify.
The aim is to present direct evidence that supports the case of the
examining party.
Leading questions (questions suggesting an answer) are generally
not allowed.
(ii) Purpose of Examination-in-Chief
To bring out relevant facts from the witness.
To support the case of the party presenting the witness.
To strengthen the prosecution or defense argument.
(iii) Rules for Conducting Examination-in-Chief
The questions must be relevant to the facts of the case.
Witnesses should state only what they have personally seen,
heard, or perceived.
No leading questions (except with permission under Section 142).
The answers given in Examination-in-Chief can be challenged in
Cross-Examination.
Example: In a murder case, a witness may be asked:
"Where were you on the night of the incident?"
"Did you see the accused at the crime scene?"
Case Law: Ramchander v. State of Haryana (1981)
 The Supreme Court ruled that Examination-in-Chief must be
conducted fairly, without coaching or influencing the witness.

3. Cross-Examination
(i) Definition
Section 144 of BSA 2023 defines Cross-Examination as the
questioning of a witness by the opposing party after the
Examination-in-Chief.
It is used to test the accuracy, credibility, and reliability of the
witness’s statement.
Leading questions are allowed.
(ii) Purpose of Cross-Examination
To challenge the truthfulness of the witness’s statements.
To find inconsistencies or contradictions in testimony.
To test the witness’s memory, perception, and bias.
To discredit unreliable or false testimony.
(iii) Rules for Conducting Cross-Examination
The opposing party can ask leading questions (Section 146).
Questions can be asked to test the credibility of the witness.
Questions should be relevant to the issue of the case.
If a witness gives false or contradictory answers, they may be
declared hostile under Section 154.
Example:
In a theft case, a witness states, "I saw the accused steal
money."
In cross-examination, the defense lawyer may ask:
o "How far were you from the accused?"
o "Was there enough light to see clearly?"
o "Did you inform the police immediately?"

Case Law: Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab (1994)

The Supreme Court emphasized that Cross-Examination is a
powerful tool for discovering the truth and must be conducted
skillfully.
4. Differences Between Examination-in-Chief and Cross-
Examination

5. Re-Examination (Section 145, BSA 2023)

If any new facts emerge during Cross-Examination, the party that
called the witness may re-examine them.
Purpose: To clarify doubts or explain contradictions.
Leading questions are not allowed in Re-Examination.
Example: If a witness is cross-examined about a previous
inconsistent statement, the lawyer in Re-Examination may ask,
"Can you explain why your previous statement differs from
today’s testimony?"
Case Law: Rajaram v. State of Rajasthan (2003)
The Supreme Court ruled that Re-Examination should be
limited to clarifying ambiguities and should not introduce new
facts.

6. Importance of These Examinations in Trial

Helps the court determine the truth – Examination-in-Chief
presents the evidence, Cross-Examination tests it, and Re-
Examination clarifies doubts.
Prevents false testimony – A witness can be discredited if their
testimony is false or inconsistent.
Aids in delivering fair justice – The process ensures that only
reliable evidence is considered in court.
Case Law: Mohd. Khalid v. State of W.B. (2002)
The Supreme Court emphasized that Examination and Cross-
Examination are fundamental rights in a fair trial and must be
conducted properly.

7. Conclusion
Examination-in-Chief is the foundation of a witness’s testimony.
Cross-Examination acts as a truth test to expose any inconsistencies.
 Re-Examination provides clarifications where needed.
Together, these processes ensure that only trustworthy evidence
is accepted in court.

Question 15: Character and Its Relevance in Civil and

Criminal Cases
Introduction
The character of a person refers to their general reputation, conduct,
and behavioral tendencies. In legal proceedings, the relevance of
character evidence depends on whether the case is civil or
criminal. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA 2023)
provides specific rules on when and how character evidence can be
admitted in court.
 In civil cases, character evidence is usually not relevant except
in specific situations.
 In criminal cases, character evidence may be relevant in
proving innocence or guilt.

1. Relevant Sections Under BSA 2023

 Section 46:
In civil cases, character evidence is generally irrelevant to prove
conduct imputed to a person, unless such character is evident from
other relevant facts.
 Section 47:
In criminal cases, the previous good character of the accused is
relevant.
 Section 48:
Evidence of character or previous sexual experience is not relevant in
certain cases,
 Section 49:
Previous bad character is generally not relevant in criminal cases,
except in reply to evidence of good character given by the accused.
 Section 50:
In civil cases, the character of a person is relevant when it affects the
amount of damages they ought to receive.
 Section 53:
In criminal cases, the fact that the accused person is of a good
character is relevant.
 Section 54:
In criminal cases, the previous bad character of the accused is not
relevant, except in reply to evidence of good character given by the
accused.
 Section 55:
In civil cases, the character of a person is relevant when it affects the
amount of damages they ought to receive.
In essence:
 Civil Cases:
Character is generally irrelevant to prove conduct, but relevant when
affecting damages.
 Criminal Cases:
Good character is relevant for the accused, while bad character is
generally not relevant, except in reply to evidence of good character.

2. Character in Civil Cases

General Rule: In civil cases, character is not relevant in proving a
person’s conduct.
 Example: If a person is accused of negligence, their good moral
character does not prove that they acted carefully in a particular
instance.
(i) Exception: When Character Becomes Relevant in Civil Cases
If a person’s character is directly in issue, it becomes relevant.
Example: In defamation, divorce, child custody, or fraud cases, a
person's character may be crucial to the case.
Case Law: Girdhari v. State of Rajasthan (2002)
The Supreme Court ruled that character evidence is irrelevant
in breach of contract cases unless the contract specifically
depends on the character of the parties.
Example Cases Where Character is Relevant in Civil Law:
Defamation Cases – If a person’s reputation is being
questioned, character is directly in issue.
Divorce Cases – Allegations of cruelty or adultery may require
evidence of character.
Exam Tip: Mention that Section 52 states a general rule, but
exceptions apply where character is in issue.

3. Character in Criminal Cases

General Rule: In criminal cases, character evidence may be
relevant depending on whether it is used to prove guilt or innocence.
(i) Good Character of the Accused
The accused can present evidence of their good character to
suggest they are less likely to have committed the crime.
Example: A person accused of theft may introduce evidence that they
have always been honest and law-abiding.
Case Law: Kashiram v. State of M.P. (2001)
The court held that good character may be considered as
supporting evidence but cannot override strong direct
evidence of guilt.
(ii) Bad Character of the Accused (Section 54, BSA 2023)
As a general rule, past criminal acts or bad character of the
accused are irrelevant.
Reason: The accused must be judged based on evidence of the
present case, not past wrongs.
Exception: If the accused puts their good character in issue, the
prosecution can rebut it by showing bad character.
Example:
If a defendant claims they have "never committed a crime," the
prosecution can introduce past criminal records to prove
otherwise.
Case Law: Govindaraju v. State of Karnataka (2013)
The Supreme Court ruled that bad character evidence is
inadmissible unless the defense raises the accused’s good
character first.

(iii) Character of the Victim (Section 53, BSA 2023)

In some cases, the character of the victim may be relevant.
Example: In rape cases, the victim’s past sexual history cannot be
used to discredit their testimony (as per amendments in Indian rape
laws).
Case Law: State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh (1996)
The Supreme Court ruled that a victim’s past sexual history is
irrelevant in sexual offense cases.
Example:
In a murder trial, if the victim was known to be violent and
aggressive, it might support the accused’s claim of self-
defense.
Exam Tip: Clearly state that bad character is not admissible unless
the accused raises their good character first.

4. Difference Between Character Evidence in Civil and

Criminal Cases
5. Importance of Character Evidence in Law
Ensures fair trial – Prevents bias against the accused based on past
actions.
Protects victims – Prevents unnecessary intrusion into a victim’s
private life.
Helps in self-defense claims – Can establish if the victim had a
violent history.
Case Law: Vishnu v. State of Maharashtra (2006)
The Supreme Court ruled that character evidence must be
handled carefully to avoid misleading the jury.

6. Conclusion
In civil cases, character is generally irrelevant unless directly in
issue.
In criminal cases, good character can support the defense, but bad
character cannot be used unless the defense raises good character
first.
The victim’s character is usually protected, especially in sensitive
cases like rape and sexual offenses.

Question 16: Define Evidence and Explain Different

Types of Evidence Along with Its Evidentiary Value
1. Introduction
The concept of evidence is fundamental to the judicial system.
Evidence is the means through which facts are proved or
disproved in a court of law. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,
2023 (BSA 2023) defines evidence and categorizes it into different
types.
Evidence can be oral, documentary, direct, circumstantial,
primary, secondary, or electronic. The evidentiary value of each
type of evidence depends on its credibility, admissibility, and
relevance under the law.
2. Definition of Evidence Under BSA 2023
Section 2(b), BSA 2023 – Definition of Evidence
"Evidence" includes:
1. Oral evidence – Statements made before the court by
witnesses.
2. Documentary evidence – Includes electronic records, written
documents, and physical materials presented before the court.
Explanation:
 Evidence is used to prove or disprove facts in a legal dispute.
 It must be relevant, admissible, and credible to be considered
by the court.
Case Law: State of Maharashtra v. Damu (2000)
 The Supreme Court held that evidence must be legally
admissible and reliable to be considered in court proceedings.

3. Types of Evidence Under BSA 2023

(i) Oral Evidence (Section 59 & 60, BSA 2023)
Defined as statements made by witnesses under oath in court.
It must be direct and given by someone who has seen, heard, or
perceived the fact.
Example: A person witnessing a murder giving testimony in court.
Evidentiary Value:
 Direct oral evidence is strong if the witness is credible.
 Cross-examination can challenge oral evidence.

Case Law: Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan (1952)

 The Supreme Court ruled that oral evidence, if found credible,
can be the sole basis of conviction.

(ii) Documentary Evidence (Sections 61-66, BSA 2023)

Includes written documents, agreements, letters, certificates, and
electronic records.
It is presented in court to prove the contents of the document.
Example: A contract produced in court to prove an agreement.
 Evidentiary Value:
 Primary evidence (original documents) is preferred over
secondary evidence.
 Forgery or tampering can reduce its reliability.

Case Law: Madhu v. State of Kerala (2012)

 The court ruled that documentary evidence must be
authenticated before being admitted.

(iii) Direct Evidence

Evidence that directly proves a fact without inference.
Example: A CCTV recording of a crime taking place.
Evidentiary Value:
 Strongest form of evidence, especially if credible and
unchallenged.
Case Law: Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)
 The Supreme Court ruled that electronic records must be
produced with proper authentication to be admissible.

(iv) Circumstantial Evidence

Indirect evidence that proves a fact through inference.
Example: Fingerprints found at a crime scene.
Evidentiary Value:
 Can be strong if a chain of circumstances is established.
 Weak if broken links exist.

Case Law: Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra

(1984)
 The Supreme Court laid down the five principles (Panchsheel)
for circumstantial evidence to be relied upon for conviction.

(v) Primary and Secondary Evidence (Sections 62 & 63, BSA 2023)
Primary evidence – The original document or object.
Secondary evidence – A copy or substitute of the original.
Example:
  Primary Evidence: The original sale deed.
 Secondary Evidence: A photocopy of the sale deed.

Evidentiary Value:
 Primary evidence is the best proof.
 Secondary evidence is allowed only in special cases (e.g., when
the original is lost).
Case Law: K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy (2011)
 The Supreme Court ruled that secondary evidence is
admissible only if conditions under Section 65, BSA 2023, are
met.

(vi) Hearsay Evidence

Evidence based on second-hand information.
Example: "My friend told me he saw the accused at the crime
scene."
Evidentiary Value:
 Generally inadmissible as it is unreliable.
 Exceptions exist in certain cases, such as dying declarations.

Case Law: Tehsildar Singh v. State of UP (1959)

 The court ruled that hearsay evidence cannot be relied upon
unless it falls under an exception.

(vii) Electronic Evidence (Section 61 &62, BSA 2023)

Includes emails, WhatsApp messages, CCTV footage, computer
records, digital signatures.
Example: A call recording proving a threat.
Evidentiary Value:
 Must be certified under Section 65B, BSA 2023 to be
admissible.
 Tampering can make it inadmissible.

Case Law: Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer (2014)

 The Supreme Court ruled that electronic records must be
certified under Section 65B to be admissible.
4. Difference Between Direct and Circumstantial
Evidence
Exam Tip: Use a table to clearly compare direct and
circumstantial evidence.

5. Importance of Evidence in the Legal System

Ensures fair trials – Prevents wrongful convictions.
Helps in proving guilt or innocence.
Strengthens judicial decisions – Courts rely on strong evidence for
verdicts.
Case Law: Laxmi Raj Shetty v. State of Tamil Nadu (1988)
 The Supreme Court emphasized that evidence must be
evaluated carefully to prevent miscarriage of justice.

6. Conclusion
Evidence is the backbone of the legal system.
Different types of evidence carry different levels of reliability and
admissibility.
Primary and direct evidence are the strongest forms of proof,
while secondary and hearsay evidence require special conditions
for admissibility.
Electronic evidence is becoming increasingly important but must
be properly certified.

Question 17: Explain the Theory of Relevancy in Detail

Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
1. Introduction
The theory of relevancy determines which facts are admissible in
court and which are not. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
(BSA 2023) lays down the rules of relevancy under Chapter II
(Sections 5 to 16).
Not all facts presented in court are admissible; only relevant facts
that have a logical connection to the case are considered. Irrelevant
facts are excluded to ensure a fair and efficient trial.

2. Meaning of Relevancy
Relevancy means a logical connection between a fact and the
issue in a case.
Relevant facts help the court decide whether a claim is true or
false.
Section 5, BSA 2023: Evidence may be given only of facts that are
relevant to the case.
Example: If A is accused of murdering B, A’s past criminal record
may or may not be relevant depending on its connection to the case.
Case Law: R v. Bedingfield (1879)
 The court ruled that only facts connected to the issue should
be considered as relevant evidence.

3. Types of Relevant Facts Under BSA 2023

The theory of relevancy is explained in Sections 6 to 16 of BSA
2023.
(i) Res Gestae – Facts Forming Part of the Same Transaction (Section
6, BSA 2023)
Events so closely linked to the incident that they form part of the
same story.
Example: If A is murdered in a crowded market, statements made by
people immediately after the incident are relevant.
✔ Case Law: R v. Foster (1834)
 The court held that statements made during an event without
premeditation are relevant as part of res gestae.
Evidentiary Value:
 High evidentiary value if made spontaneously and without
manipulation.
(ii) Facts Necessary to Explain or Introduce Evidence (Section 7, BSA
2023)
Example: If a gun is found near the crime scene, its discovery is
relevant to proving the crime.
Evidentiary Value:
 Essential for providing background and context to main
evidence.

(iii) Facts Showing Cause and Effect (Section 8, BSA 2023)

Events that cause or result from the incident.
Example: A fire breaks out in a house, and an explosion was heard
just before it. The explosion is relevant to proving the cause of the
fire.
Case Law: R v. Palmer (1856)
 The court held that prior threats and actions showing intent
are relevant to proving a crime.
Evidentiary Value:
 Strong if there is a clear cause-and-effect relationship.

(iv) Motive, Preparation, and Previous Conduct (Section 9, BSA 2023)

Motive: Reason why a person committed an act.
Preparation: Steps taken before committing the act.
Previous Conduct: Past behavior related to the incident.
Example: If A is accused of poisoning B, the fact that A bought
poison before the crime is relevant.
Case Law: State of Maharashtra v. K.C. Purohit (1980)
 The Supreme Court held that motive and preparation are
relevant to proving a crime.
Evidentiary Value:
 Important but not necessary – motive alone does not prove
guilt.
(v) Facts Relevant When the State of Mind Is in Question (Section 10,
BSA 2023)
Example: A person claims self-defense in a murder case. Their past
threats or fear of the victim are relevant to proving their state of
mind.
Case Law: Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor (1939)
 The Privy Council ruled that past statements showing intention
are relevant when mental state is in question.
Evidentiary Value:
 Essential in cases of self-defense, insanity, or criminal
intention.

(vi) Similar Fact Evidence (Section 11, BSA 2023)

Evidence of previous similar acts to establish a pattern of behavior.
Example: If A is accused of fraud, proof that A committed similar
frauds in the past may be relevant.
Case Law: Makin v. Attorney-General (1894)
 The court held that similar fact evidence is admissible only if it
directly proves the case.
Evidentiary Value:
 Admissible only if it directly connects to the case.

(vii) Custom and Habit (Section 12, BSA 2023)

Customary practices followed by a person or community.
Example: A person claims that in their village, property is inherited
by daughters. The court may consider proof of this custom.
Evidentiary Value:
 Relevant in property and family law cases.

(viii) Facts that Make the Existence or Non-Existence of a Fact More

Probable (Section 13, BSA 2023)
Example: If A is accused of theft, proof that A was seen near the
stolen item makes the theft more probable.
Evidentiary Value:
 Strengthens or weakens a claim based on logical probability.

(ix) Facts Showing a Continuous Course of Conduct (Section 14, BSA

2023)
Example: If A is accused of domestic violence, past complaints
against A may be relevant to show a pattern of abuse.
Evidentiary Value:
 Useful in proving habitual offenses.

(x) Admissions and Confessions (Sections 15-16, BSA 2023)

Admission: A statement that suggests an adverse fact against the
person making it.
Confession: A direct acknowledgment of guilt in a criminal case.
Example: A person admits in police custody that they stole money.
Case Law: Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor (1939)
 The Privy Council ruled that confessions must be voluntary and
truthful to be admissible.
Evidentiary Value:
 Highly valuable but subject to strict rules of admissibility.

4. Difference Between Relevancy and Admissibility

Exam Tip: Use a table to differentiate relevancy and admissibility.

5. Importance of Relevancy in the Legal System

Ensures only material facts are considered.
Prevents unnecessary delays by excluding irrelevant facts.
Helps in fair decision-making based on logically connected facts.
Case Law: R v. White (1910)
 The court ruled that facts that do not contribute to proving the
issue in the case should not be admitted.
6. Conclusion
Relevancy is a fundamental principle of evidence law.
It ensures that only logically connected facts are admitted in court.
Sections 5-16, BSA 2023, define what facts are relevant and how
they can be used.
The difference between relevancy and admissibility must be
carefully understood.

Question 18: Difference Between Admission and

Confession Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam,
2023

1. Introduction
In legal proceedings, statements made by parties can be crucial in
proving a case. The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA
2023) classifies such statements as admissions and confessions.
Admission applies to both civil and criminal cases.
Confession applies only in criminal cases where an accused admits
guilt.

2. Definition of Admission and Confession

(i) Admission – Section 15, BSA 2023
Meaning:
 An admission is a statement that suggests an inference about
a relevant fact.
 It is made by a party to the case and can be used as evidence
against them.
Key Features:
 Can be oral, written, or through conduct.
 Made voluntarily by a party.
 Used in both civil and criminal cases.

Example:
  A, in a property dispute, admits, “I borrowed ₹5 lakh from B
and promised to mortgage my land.”
 This statement is an admission that helps establish the loan
agreement.
Case Law: R. v. Redding (1955)
 The court held that an admission does not directly establish
guilt but helps prove facts relevant to the case.

(ii) Confession – Section 16, BSA 2023

Meaning:
 A confession is a direct acknowledgment of guilt by an
accused person.
 It is a special type of admission applicable only in criminal
cases.
Key Features:
 Directly proves guilt of the accused.
 Must be voluntary and truthful to be admissible.
 Can be retracted, but a voluntary confession has high
evidentiary value.
Example:
 A is accused of murder. He tells the police, “I killed B with a
knife because he insulted me.”
 This is a confession as it directly accepts guilt.

Case Law: Pakala Narayana Swami v. Emperor (1939)

 The Privy Council ruled that a confession must be a direct
acknowledgment of guilt, not just an admission of
circumstances.

3. Types of Admissions and Confessions

(i) Types of Admissions Under BSA 2023
1. Formal and Informal Admission
o Formal Admission: Made during court proceedings.
o Informal Admission: Made outside court but still relevant.
 2. Judicial and Extra-Judicial Admission
o Judicial Admission: Made in court before a judge (strong
evidentiary value).
o Extra-Judicial Admission: Made outside court (weaker
evidentiary value).
3. Voluntary and Involuntary Admission
o Voluntary Admission: Made freely and willingly.
o Involuntary Admission: Made under duress or coercion
(inadmissible in court).

(ii) Types of Confessions Under BSA 2023

1. Judicial and Extra-Judicial Confession
o Judicial Confession: Made before a magistrate or in court
(high evidentiary value).
o Extra-Judicial Confession: Made to any person outside
court (less reliable but admissible).
2. Voluntary and Involuntary Confession
o Voluntary Confession: Made freely and without coercion
(admissible).
o Involuntary Confession: Made under threats, torture, or
inducement (inadmissible under Section 24, BSA 2023).
Case Law: State of Punjab v. Bhajan Singh (1975)
 The Supreme Court held that an involuntary confession has no
evidentiary value.

4. Key Differences Between Admission and Confession

Exam Tip: Use a table format to clearly present differences.

5. Admissibility of Admission and Confession

Admission Section 15

 Relevant if made voluntarily and related to the case.

Section 16:
  Admissible only if it is voluntary and truthful.
 Confessions made under coercion or inducement are
inadmissible.
Section 17, BSA 2023: A confession made to a police officer is not
admissible, except in certain circumstances.
Case Law: Aghnoo Nagesia v. State of Bihar (1966)
 The Supreme Court held that a confession must be voluntary
and not made under police pressure.

6. Importance of Admission and Confession in Law

In Civil Cases: Admissions help in deciding property, contract, and
family disputes.
In Criminal Cases: Confessions can be crucial but must be carefully
examined.
Prevents False Convictions: Courts ensure confessions are
voluntary before convicting.
Case Law: State of U.P. v. Deoman Upadhyaya (1960)
 The Supreme Court ruled that a confession must be scrutinized
for voluntariness before being relied upon.

7. Conclusion
Admissions and confessions are important evidentiary tools
under BSA 2023.
Admissions apply to both civil and criminal cases, while
confessions apply only to criminal cases.
Confessions directly establish guilt, whereas admissions only
suggest relevant facts.
Courts carefully scrutinize confessions to prevent false
convictions.