Indian Evidence Act, 1872–Relevancy & Admissibility of Fact
- Legal vs. Logical Relevancy: Relevancy is the connection of events as cause & effect. Relevancy may be legal and logical. Legal relevancy is mainly based upon the logical relevancy but not vice-versa. But it is not correct to say that what is logically relevant is necessarily legally relevant. Evidence Act is only concerned with the legal relevancy & not with the logical relevancy/ reasoning.
- Legal Relevancy vs. Legal Admissibility: A fact is said to be legally relevant to another only when the one is connected with the other in any of the ways referred to in Sections 5 to 55 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (IEA). While the admissibility of facts has been dealt with under Sections 56-100 of the IEA.
- Relevancy vs. Legal Admissibility (Whether co-extensive): Relevancy & admissibility are not co-extensive & not interchangeable terms. Relevancy is a genus while admissibility is a species. Relevancy is a body whereas admissibility is a nucleus. It is to be noted that all admissible evidence are relevant but all relevant evidence are not admissible. Only those evidence are admissible which are mentioned under sections 6-55 of the IEA. More clearly, a fact may be relevant but it may be excluded on the ground of public policy. For example, a communication to a legal adviser may be in the highest degree relevant, but other consideration excludes its reception as a ‘privileged communication’ and is not admissible.
- Admissibility of evidence obtained by undesirable means (Sting Operations)—The relevant evidence remains relevant irrespective of the fact that the same was obtained by undesirable or unlawful means. Sting operations nowadays are the best examples of admissibility of the evidence obtained by undesirable means.
- Distinction b/w relevancy & admissibility:
| Sl | Relevancy | Admissibility |
| 1 | Relevancy means what is logically probative. | While admissibility is not based upon the logic rather on strict rules. |
| 2 | Relevancy is dealt with u/s 5-55 | Admissibility is dealt with u/s 56-100. |
| 3 | All relevant facts need not be admissible | While all admissible facts are relevant. |
| 4 | Relevancy is wider in scope | It is narrower and not co-extensive with relevancy. |
| 5 | Relevancy is genus | Admissibility is species. |
- Section 5—
- Section 5 clearly provides that an evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts only as prescribed under Sections 6-55 of the IEA.
- However, any person shall not give evidence of a fact which he is disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force relating to Civil Procedure.
- Illustration: A is tried for the murder of B by beating him with a club with the intention of causing his death. At A’s trial the following facts are in issue—
- A’s beating B with the club;
- A’s causing B’s death by such beating;
- A’s intention to cause B’s death.
- Illustration: In readiness for production at the first hearing of the case, A suitor does not bring with him a bond on which he relies. This section does not enable him to produce the bond or prove its contents at a subsequent stage of the proceedings, otherwise than in accordance with the conditions prescribed by the CPC, 1908.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by team LegalMines. Typographical error, if any, is inadvertent. The copyright as to contents and the style are with the LegalMines.
