(a) A and B are jointly tried for the murder of C. It is proved that A said––“B and I murdered C”. The Court may consider the effect of this confession as against B.

(b) A is on his trial for the murder of C. There is evidence to show that C was murdered by A and B, and that B said ––“A and I murdered C”. This statement may not be taken into consideration by the Court against A, as B is not being jointly tried. 31. Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop.––Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted but they may operate as estoppels under the provisions hereinafter contained. STATEMENTS BY PERSONS WHO CANNOT BE CALLED AS WITNESSES 32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant. –– Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which under the circumstances of the case appears to the Court unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases: ––

(a).––When the statement is contained in any deed, will or other document which relates to any such transaction as is mentioned in section 13, clause

(a).

(a) The question is, whether A was murdered by B; or A dies of injuries received in a transaction in the course of which she was ravished. The question is whether she was ravished by B; or The question is, whether A was killed by B under such circumstances that a suit would lie against B by A’s widow. Statements made by A as to the cause of his or her death, referring respectively to the murder, the rape and the actionable wrong under consideration, are relevant facts.

(b) The question is as to the date of A’s birth. An entry in the diary of a deceased surgeon regularly kept in the course of business, stating that, on a given day he attended A’s mother and delivered her of a son, is a relevant fact.

(c) The question is, whether A was in Calcutta on a given day. A statement in the diary of a deceased solicitor, regularly kept in the course of business, that on a given day the solicitor attended A at a place mentioned, in Calcutta, for the purpose of conferring with him upon specified business, is a relevant fact.

(d) The question is, whether a ship sailed from Bombay harbour on a given day. A letter written by a deceased member of a merchant’s firm by which she was chartered to their correspondents in London, to whom the cargo was consigned, stating that the ship sailed on a given day from Bombay harbour, is a relevant fact. 1. Ins. by Act 18 of 1872, s. 2. 23

(e) The question is, whether rent was paid to A for certain land. A letter from A’s deceased agent to A, saying that he had received the rent on A’s account and held it at A’s orders is a relevant fact.

(f) The question is, whether A and B were legally married. The statement of a deceased clergyman that he married them under such circumstances that the celebration would be a crime, is relevant.

(g) The question is, whether A, a person who cannot be found, wrote a letter on a certain day. The fact that a letter written by him is dated on that day is relevant.

(h) The question is, what was the cause of the wreck of a ship. A protest made by the Captain, whose attendance cannot be procured, is a relevant fact.

(i) The question is, whether a given road is a public way. A statement by A, a deceased headman of the village, that the road was public, is a relevant fact.

(j) The question is, what was the price of grain on a certain day in a particular market. A statement of the price, made by a deceased banya in the ordinary course of his business, is a relevant fact.

(k) The question is, whether A, who is dead, was the father of B. A statement by A that B was his son, is a relevant fact.

(l) The question is, what was the date of the birth of A. A letter from A’s deceased father to a friend, announcing the birth of A on a given day, is a relevant fact.

(m) The question is, whether, and when, A and B were married. An entry in a memorandum book by C, the deceased father of B, of his daughter’s marriage with A on a given date, is a relevant fact.

(n) A sues B for a libel expressed in a painted caricature exposed in a shop window. The question is as to the similarity of the caricature and its libellous character. The remarks of a crowd of spectators on these points may be proved. 33. Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, the truth of facts therein stated.––Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable: Provided –– that the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest; that the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine; that the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding. Explanation.––A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of this section. 24 STATEMENTS MADE UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES 34. Entries in books of account when relevant.––1[Entries in the books of account, including those maintained in an electronic form], regularly kept in the course of business, are relevant whenever they refer to a matter into which the Court has to inquire, but such statements shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability. Illustration A sues B for Rs. 1,000, and shows entries in his account books showing B to be indebted to him to this amount. The entries are relevant, but are not sufficient, without other evidence, to prove the debt. 35. Relevancy of entry in public record made in performance of duty.–– An entry in any public or other official book, register or 2[record or an electronic record], stating a fact in issue or relevant fact, and made by a public servant in the discharge of his official duty, or by any other person in performance of a duty specially enjoined by the law of the country in which such book, register or 2[record or an electronic record], is kept, is itself a relevant fact. 36. Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans.––Statements of facts in issue or relevant facts, made in published maps or charts generally offered for public sale, or in maps or plans made under the authority of 3[the Central Government or any State Government], as to matters usually represented or stated in such maps, charts or plans, are themselves relevant facts. 37. Relevancy of statement as to fact of public nature contained in certain Acts or notifications. ––When the Court has to form an opinion as to the existence of any fact of a public nature, any statement of it, made in a recital contained in any Act of Parliament 4[of the United Kingdom] or in any 5[Central Act, Provincial Act or 6[a State Act] or in a Government notification or notification by the Crown Representative appearing in the Official Gazette or in any printed paper purporting to be the London Gazette or the Government Gazette of any Dominion, colony or possession of his Majesty is a relevant fact]. 7 * * * * * 38. Relevancy of statements as to any law contained in law-books.––When the Court has to form an opinion as to a law of any country, any statement of such law contained in a book purporting to be printed or published under the authority of the Government of such country and to contain any such law, and any report of a ruling of the Courts of such country contained in a book purporting to be a report of such rulings, is relevant. HOW MUCH OF A STATEMENT IS TO BE PROVED 8 [39. What evidence to be given when statement forms part of a conversation, document, electronic record, book or series of letters or papers.––When any statement of which evidence is given 1. Subs. by Act 21 of 2000, s. 92 and the Second Schedule, for “entries in the books of account” (w.e.f. 17-10-2000). 2. Subs. by s. 92 and the Second Schedule, ibid., for “record” (w.e.f. 17-10-2000). 3. Subs. by the A.O. 1948, for “any Government in British India”. 4. Ins. by the A. O. 1950. 5. The original words were “Act of the Governor General of India in Council or of the Governors in Council of Madras or Bombay, or of the Lieutenant Governor in Council of Bengal, or in a notification of the Government appearing in the Gazette of India, or in the Gazette of any L.G., or in any printed paper purporting to be the London Gazette or the Government Gazette of any colony or possession of the Queen, is a relevant fact”. This was amended first by the Repealing and Amending Act, 1914 (10 of 1914), and then by the A.O. 1937, the A.O. 1948 and the A.O. 1950 to read as above. 6. Subs. by Act 3 of 1951, s. 3 and the Schedule, for “an Act of the Legislature of a Part A State or a Part C State”. 7. The “last paragraph” omitted by Act 10 of 1914, s. 3 and the Second Schedule. 8. Subs. by Act 21 of 2000, s. 92 and the Second Schedule, for “s. 39” (w.e.f. 17-10-2000). 25 forms part of a longer statement, or of a conversation or part of an isolated document, or is contained in a document which forms part of a book, or is contained in part of electronic record or of a connected series of letters or papers, evidence shall be given of so much and no more of the statement, conversation, document, electronic record, book or series of letters or papers as the Court considers necessary in that particular case to the full understanding of the nature and effect of the statement, and of the circumstances under which it was made.] JUDGMENTS OF COURTS OF JUSTICE WHEN RELEVANT 40. Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial.––The existence of any judgment, order or decree which by law prevents any Court from taking cognizance of a suit or holding a trial, is a relevant fact when the question is whether such Court ought to take cognizance of such suit or to hold such trial. 41. Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction.––A final judgment, order or decree of a competent Court, in the exercise of probate, matrimonial, admiralty or insolvency jurisdiction, which confers upon or takes away from any person any legal character, or which declares any person to be entitled to any such character, or to be entitled to any specific thing, not as against any specified person but absolutely, is relevant when the existence of any such legal character, or the title of any such person to any such thing, is relevant. Such judgment, order or decree is conclusive proof –– that any legal character which it confers accrued at the time when such judgment, order or decree came into operation; that any legal character, to which it declares any such person to be entitled, accrued to that person at the time when such judgment 1[order or decree] declares it to have accrued to that person; that any legal character which it takes away from any such person ceased at the time from which such judgment, 1[order or decree] declared that it had ceased or should cease; and that anything to which it declares any person to be so entitled was the property of that person at the time from which such judgment, 1[order or decree] declares that it had been or should be his property. 42. Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in section 41. –– Judgments, orders or decrees other than those mentioned in section 41 are relevant if they relate to matters of a public nature relevant to the enquiry; but such judgments, orders or decrees are not conclusive proof of that which they state. Illustration A sues B for trespass on his land. B alleges the existence of a public right of way over the land, which A denies. The existence of a decree in favour of the defendant, in a suit by A against C for a trespass on the same land, in which C alleged the existence of the same right of way, is relevant, but it is not conclusive proof that the right of way exists. 43. Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in sections 40, 41 and 42, when relevant.–– Judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in sections 40, 41 and 42, are irrelevant, unless the existence of such judgment, order or decree is a fact in issue, or is relevant under some other provision of this Act. 1. Ins. by Act 18 of 1872, s. 3. 26 Illustrations

(a) A and B separately sue C for a libel which reflects upon each of them. C in each case says that the matter alleged to be libellous is true, and the circumstances are such that it is probably true in each case, or in neither. A obtains a decree against C for damages on the ground that C failed to make out his justification. The fact is irrelevant as between B and C.

(b) A prosecutes B for adultery with C, A’s wife. B denies that C is A’s wife, but the Court convicts B of adultery. Afterwards, C is prosecuted for bigamy in marrying B during A’s lifetime. C says that she never was A’s wife. The judgment against B is irrelevant as against C.

(c) A prosecutes B for stealing a cow from him. B is convicted. A afterwards sues C for the cow, which B had sold to him before his conviction. As between A and C, the judgment against B is irrelevant.

(d) A has obtained a decree for the possession of land against B. C, B’s son, murders A in consequence. The existence of the judgment is relevant, as showing motive for a crime. 1 [

(e) A is charged with theft and with having been previously convicted of theft. The previous conviction is relevant as a fact in issue.

(f) A is tried for the murder of B. The fact that B prosecuted A for libel and that A was convicted and sentenced is relevant under section 8 as showing the motive for the fact in issue.] 44. Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved.––Any party to a suit or other proceeding may show that any judgment, order or decree which is relevant under section 40, 41 or 42, and which has been proved by the adverse party, was delivered by a Court not competent to deliver it, or was obtained by fraud or collusion. OPINIONS OF THIRD PERSONS WHEN RELEVANT 45. Opinions of experts.––When the Court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law or of science, or art, or as to identity of handwriting 2[or finger impressions], the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art, 3[or in questions as to identity of handwriting] 2 [or finger impressions] are relevant facts. Such persons are called experts. Illustrations

(a) The question is, whether the death of A was caused by poison. The opinions of experts as to the symptoms produced by the poison by which A is supposed to have died, are relevant. 1. Ins. by Act 3 of 1891, s. 5. 2. Ins. by Act 5 of 1899, s. 3 for discussion in Council as to whether “finger impressions” include “thumb impressions” see Gazette of India, 1898, pt.VI, p. 24. 3. Ins. by Act 18 of 1872, s. 4. 27

(b) The question is, whether A, at the time of doing a certain act, was, by reason of unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that he was doing what was either wrong or contrary to law. The opinions of experts upon the question whether the symptoms exhibited by A commonly show unsoundness of mind, and whether such unsoundness of mind usually renders persons incapable of knowing the nature of the acts which they do, or of knowing that what they do is either wrong or contrary to law, are relevant.

(c) The question is, whether a certain document was written by A. Another document is produced which is proved or admitted to have been written by A. The opinions of experts on the question whether the two documents were written by the same person or by different persons, are relevant. 1 [45A. Opinion of Examiner of Electronic Evidence.—When in a proceeding, the court has to form an opinion on any matter relating to any information transmitted or stored in any computer resource or any other electronic or digital form, the opinion of the Examiner of Electronic Evidence referred to in section 79A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), is a relevant fact. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section, an Examiner of Electronic Evidence shall be an expert.] 46. Facts bearing upon opinions of experts.––Facts, not otherwise relevant, are relevant if they support or are inconsistent with the opinions of experts, when such opinions are relevant. Illustrations

(a) The question is, whether A was poisoned by a certain poison. The fact that other persons, who were poisoned by that poison, exhibited certain symptoms which experts affirm or deny to be the symptoms of that poison, is relevant.

(b) The question is, whether an obstruction to a harbour is caused by a certain sea-wall. The fact that other harbours similarly situated in other respects, but where there were no such sea-walls, began to be obstructed at about the same time, is relevant. 47. Opinion as to hand-writing, when relevant.––When the Court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom any document was written or signed, the opinion of any person acquainted with the handwriting of the person by whom it is supposed to be written or signed that it was or was not written or signed by that person, is a relevant fact. Explanation.––A person is said to be acquainted with the hand-writing of another person when he has seen that person write, or when he has received documents purporting to be written by that person in answer to documents written by himself or under his authority and addressed to that person, or when, in the ordinary course of business, documents purporting to be written by that person have been habitually submitted to him. 1. Ins. by Act 10 of 2009, s. 52 (w.e.f. 27-10-2009). 28 Illustration The question is, whether a given letter is in the hand-writing of A, a merchant in London. B is a merchant in Calcutta, who has written letters addressed to A and received letters purporting to be written by him. C, is B’s clerk whose duty it was to examine and file B’s correspondence. D is B’s broker, to whom B habitually submitted the letters purporting to be written by A for the purpose of advising with him thereon. The opinions of B, C and D on the question whether the letter is in the handwriting of A are relevant, though neither B, C nor D ever saw A write. 1 [47A. Opinion as to digital signature, when relevant.––When the Court has to form an opinion as to the 2[electronic signature of any person, the opinion of the Certifying Authority which has issued the 3 [electronic Signature Certificate] is a relevant fact.] 48. Opinion as to existence of right or custom, when relevant.––When the Court has to form an opinion as to the existence of any general custom or right, the opinions, as to the existence of such custom or right, of persons who would be likely to know of its existence if it existed, are relevant. Explanation.––The expression “general custom or right” includes customs or rights common to any considerable class of persons. Illustration The right of the villagers of a particular village to use the water of a particular well is a general right within the meaning of this section. 49. Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant. –– When the Court has to form an opinion as to–– the usages and tenets of any body of men or family, the constitution and government of any religious or charitable foundation, or the meaning of words or terms used in particular districts or by particular classes of people, the opinions of persons having special means of knowledge thereon are, relevant facts. 50. Opinion on relationship, when relevant. ––When the Court has to form an opinion as to the relationship of one person to another, the opinion, expressed by conduct, as to the existence of such relationship, of any person who, as a member of the family or otherwise, has special means of knowledge on the subject, is a relevant fact: Provided that such opinion shall not be sufficient to prove a marriage in proceedings under the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (4 of 1869), or in prosecutions under section 494, 495, 497 or 498 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860). Illustrations

(a) The question is, whether A and B, were married. The fact that they were usually received and treated by their friends as husband and wife, is relevant. 1. Ins. by Act 21 of 2000, s. 92 and the Second Schedule (w.e.f. 17-10-2000). 2. Subs. by Act 10 of 2009, s. 52, for “digital signature” (w.e.f. 27-10-2009). 3. Subs. by s 52, ibid., for “Digital Signature Certificate” (w.e.f. 27-10-2009). 29

(b) The question is, whether A was the legitimate son of B. The fact that A was always treated as such by members of the family, is relevant. 51. Grounds of opinion, when relevant.––Whenever the opinion of any living person is relevant, the grounds on which such opinion is based are also relevant. Illustration An expert may give an account of experiments performed by him for the purpose of forming his opinion. CHARACTER WHEN RELEVANT 52. In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed, irrelevant.––In civil cases, the fact that the character of any person concerned is such as to render probable or improbable any conduct imputed to him, is irrelevant, except in so far as such character appears from facts otherwise relevant. 53. In criminal cases previous good character relevant.––In criminal proceedings, the fact that the person accused is of a good character, is relevant. 1 [53A. Evidence of character or previous sexual experience not relevant in certain cases.–– In a prosecution for an offence under section 354, section 354A, section 354B, section 354C, section 354D, section 376, 2[section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB] or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or for attempt to commit any such offence, where the question of consent is in issue, evidence of the character of the victim or of such person’s previous sexual experience with any person shall not be relevant on the issue of such consent or the quality of consent.] 3 [54. Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply.–– In criminal proceedings, the fact that the accused person has a bad character, is irrelevant, unless evidence has been given that he has a good character, in which case it becomes relevant. Explanation 1.––This section does not apply to cases in which the bad character of any person is itself a fact in issue. Explanation 2. ––