Section 136 of IEA : 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 t...

The content above is a free preview available without login.

Login now to access this section in the Kanoon Library and unlock full, well-structured, and expertly formatted content with KanoonGPT Search and easy navigation using previous/next section buttons.

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 pro...

Explanation using Example

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 t...