The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS
PART III: PRODUCTION AND EFFECT OF EVIDENCE
CHAPTER X: - OF THE EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Section 136: Judge to decide as to admissibility of evidence.
Bare Act
When either party proposes to give evidence of any fact, the Judge may ask the party proposing to give the evidence in what manner the alleged fact, if proved, would be relevant; and the Judge shall admit the evidence if he thinks that the fact, if proved, would be relevant, and not otherwise.
If the fact proposed to be proved is one of which evidence is admissible only upon proof of some other fact, such last-mentioned fact must be proved before evidence is given of the fact first-mentioned, unless the party undertakes to give proof of such fact, and the Court is satisfied with such undertaking.
If the relevancy of one alleged fact depends upon another alleged fact being first proved, the Judge may, in his discretion, either permit evidence of the first fact to be given before the second fact is proved, or require evidence to be given of the second fact before evidence is given of the first fact.
Illustrations
- (a) It is proposed to prove a statement about a relevant fact by a person alleged to be dead, which statement is relevant under section 32. The fact that the person is dead must be proved by the person proposing to prove the statement, before evidence is given of the statement.
- (b) It is proposed to prove, by a copy, the contents of a document said to be lost. The fact that the original is lost must be proved by the person proposing to produce the copy, before the copy is produced.
- (c) A is accused of receiving stolen property knowing it to have been stolen. It is proposed to prove that he denied the possession of the property. The relevancy of the denial depends on the identity of the property. The Court may, in its discretion, either require the property to be identified before the denial of the possession is proved, or permit the denial of the possession to be proved before the property is identified.
- (d) It is proposed to prove a fact (A) which is said to have been the cause or effect of fact in issue. There are several intermediate facts (B, C and D) which must be shown to exist before the fact (A) can be regarded as the cause or effect of the fact in issue. The Court may either permit A to be proved before B, C or D is proved, or may require proof of B, C and D before permitting proof of A.
Simplified Act
When either side in a case wants to present evidence about a fact, the Judge can ask them to explain how that fact is relevant to the case. The Judge will allow the evidence if they believe the fact is relevant, otherwise, they will not allow it.
If the fact that someone wants to prove can only be shown after proving another fact first, then the first fact must be proven before presenting the second fact, unless the person promises to prove the first fact later and the Court accepts this promise.
If proving one fact depends on another fact being proven first, the Judge can decide whether to allow the first fact to be presented before the second fact is proven, or require the second fact to be proven first.
Examples
- (a) If someone wants to use a statement made by a person who is said to be dead, they must first p… Read the complete text with KanoonGPT Pro.
Explanation using examples
Example 1:
Scenario: A murder trial where the prosecution wants to introduce a dying declaration as evidence.
Context: The prosecution claims that the victim, before dying, made a statement identifying the accused as the attacker. This statement is considered relevant under Section 32 of the Indian Evidence Act, which deals with statements made by persons who are dead.
Application of Section 136:
- The Judge asks the prosecution to prove that the victim is indeed dead before allowing the dying declaration to be admitted as evidence.
- The prosecution presents the death certificate and testimony from the attending doctor to establish the death of the victim.
- Satisfied with the proof of death, the Judge admits the dying declaration as evidence.
Example 2:
Scenario: A civil case involving a disputed property where one party wants to introduce a photocopy of a lost property deed.
Context: The plaintiff claims that the original property deed has been lost and wants to submit a photocopy as evidence to prove ownership.
Application of Section 136:
- The Judge asks the plaintiff to prove that the original deed is indeed lost before allowing the photocopy to be admitted as evidence.
- The plaintiff provides testimony and an affidavit stating the circumstances under which the original deed was lost, along with a police report filed for the lost document.
- Satisfied with the proof of the loss of the original deed, the Judge admits the photocopy as evidence.
Example 3:
Scenario: A theft case where the accused is charged with receiving stolen goods.
Context: The prosecution wants to introduce evidence that the accused denied possession of the stolen goods when questioned by the police.
Application of Section 136:
- The Judge asks the prosecution to first establish the identity of the stolen goods before allowing the evidence of the accused's denial to be admitted.
- The prosecution presents evidence, such as witness testimony and photographs, to identify the stolen goods.
- Satisfied with the identification of the stolen goods, the Judge admits the evidence of the accused's denial of possession.
Example 4:
Scenario: A contract dispute where one party claims that a series of emails constitute an agreement.
Context: The plaintiff wants to introduce a chain of emails to prove that an agreement was reached between the parties.
Application of Section 136:
- The Judge asks the plaintiff to first prove the authenticity of the emails before allowing them to be admitted as evidence.
- The plaintiff presents evidence such as server logs, expert testimony on email authenticity, and the email headers to establish the authenticity of the emails.
- Satisfied with the proof of authenticity, the Judge admits the emails as evidence of the agreement.
Example 5:
Scenario: A fraud case where the prosecution wants to introduce a ledger showing fraudulent transactions.
Context: The prosecution claims that the ledger, maintained by the accused, contains entries of fraudulent transactions.
Application of Section 136:
- The Judge asks the prosecution to first prove that the ledger was maintained by the accused before allowing the entries to be admitted as evidence.
- The prosecution presents handwriting analysis, witness testimony, and other corroborative evidence to establish that the ledger was indeed maintained by the accused.
- Satisfied with the proof that the ledger was maintained by the accused, the Judge admits the entries as evidence of fraudulent transactions.
