Evidence Act · Chapter II · Of the relevancy of facts

Evidence Act section 43 in the BSA

Evidence Act 43BSA 37

Evidence Act section 43, “Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in sections 40, 41 and 42, when relevant”, is now BSA section 37 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, in force from 1 July 2024.

What changed

From Evidence Act 43 to BSA 37

Now BSA section 37, with the same rule; the illustration about adultery is dropped.

The official text

Old and new, side by side

Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Section 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.

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.

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.

(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.

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Section 37 Judgments, etc., other than those mentioned in sections 34, 35 and 36 when relevant

Judgments or orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in sections 34, 35 and 36, 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 Adhiniyam.

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 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.

(c) 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.

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

(e) 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 6 as showing the motive for the fact in issue.

The texts are India Code’s. The amendment markers and footnotes of the official print are left out, so the old section reads as it stood when it was repealed. The PDFs linked below carry the full history.

Old law or new?

Which one applies to a case

The BSA repealed the Indian Evidence Act from 1 July 2024 (section 170(1)). Any application, trial, inquiry, investigation, proceeding or appeal pending immediately before that date is dealt with under the Evidence Act as it then stood, as if the BSA had not come into force (section 170(2)).