Indian Evidence Act, 1872 · Chapter II: Of the Relevancy of Facts
Section 5: Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to matters and proceedings from before that date, as the repealing law provides.
In plain words
Evidence can be given in any case only of facts in issue and of facts this Act declares relevant, and of no others. This does not allow evidence that civil procedure law bars a person from giving.
Example: A is tried for murdering B by beating him with a club. The facts in issue are the beating, that it caused death, and A's intention to cause death.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
Evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence or non-existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others.
Explanation.––This section shall not enable any person to 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 Procedure5.
Illustrations
(a) 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.
(b) A suitor does not bring with him, and have in readiness for production at the first hearing of the case, 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 Code of Civil Procedure5.
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 5
-
P Krishna Mohan Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Whether the statement of an accused u/s.161, Cr.P.C implicating co-accused can be looked into qua such co-accused at the stage of anticipatory bail or regular bail; whether the High Court exercised its discretion in a…
- Arvind Kumar v. State of Nct, Delhi
- Subhash Mendiratta v. Sureshb Mendiratta
- State of Maharashtra v. Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil Ansari & Ors.
- P.N. Krishna Lal and Ors. Etc. Etc. v. Govt. of Kerala and Anr. Etc. Etc.
- Rabindra Kumar Dey v. State of Orissa
- Union of India and Ors. v. Sugauli Sugar Works (P) Ltd.
- State of Andhra Pradesh v. Cheemalapati Ganeswara Rao & Anr.