PROJECT

Evidence Law
“Facts Necessary to explain or Introduce Relevant Facts”

SUBMITTED TO

Professor:- S B Prakash
United World School of Law (UWSL),
Karnavati University
(Faculty- Evidence Law)

SUBMITTED BY

Evidence Law Page 1

 Name: - Fatin Tirmizi
Semester: - 6
Section: -B

United World School of Law

Karnavati University.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE......................................................................................3
ACKNOWLEGEMENT..................................................................................................................4
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY....................................................................................................5
 Whether Primary or Secondary........................................................................................5
OBJECTIVES OF STUDY.............................................................................................................5
RESEARCH QUESTIONS.............................................................................................................5
LIMITATION...................................................................................................................................6
1. Introduction to Indian Evidence Act............................................................................................7
Applicability of the Act.................................................................................................................7
Contents........................................................................................................................................8
2. What do we mean by FACTS?....................................................................................................9
3. What Facts Are Relevant?..........................................................................................................11
Logically relevant and legally relevant......................................................................................11
4. Facts Necessary to explain or Introduce Relevant Facts...........................................................13
1. Explanatory facts:..................................................................................................................13
2. Introductory facts:..................................................................................................................14
3. Facts supporting inference:....................................................................................................14
4. Facts establishing identity of thing or person:.......................................................................15
Identification of person:........................................................................................................15
5. Conclusions and Suggestions....................................................................................................16
BIBLIOGRAPHY..........................................................................................................................17

Evidence Law Page 2

 DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I hereby declare that the work reported in the BB.A. LL.B. Project Report entitled
“Facts Necessary to explain or Introduce Relevant Facts” submitted at United
World School of law,Karnavati University is an authentic record of my work
carried out under the supervision of Prof S B Prakash.

Fatin Tirmizi
United World School of law, Karnavati University

Evidence Law Page 3

 ACKNOWLEGEMENT

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Prof S B Prakash Sir, for his
invaluable support, guidance and advice. I would also like to thank my parents who
have always been there to support me. I would also like to thank the library staff
for working long hours to facilitate us with required material going a long way in
quenching my thirst for education.
Moreover, thanks to all those who helped me in any way be it words, presence,
encouragement or blessings.

Evidence Law Page 4

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

 Whether Doctrinal or Non Doctrinal?

My research is an imperative use of Doctrinal Research. Doctrinal in the sense that i
have collected theoretical material from different sources such as text books and
Internet resources.
 Analytical or Descriptive?
I have tried to be analytical in writing this project but nevertheless I have included
statistics and important quotes from different sources, as and when considered
suitable.
 Whether Primary orSecondary?
Now coming on to whether my research is primary or secondary. My research is ablend
of primary sources, like judgments of the case, and secondary sources like books, articles,
magazines and law journals.

OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
The study is conducted keeping in mind the following objectives and purposes:

1. To study about the Indian Evidence Act

2. To study in detail about Facts.
3. To see what facts are relevant for the purposes of Evidence Act.
4. To understand about Facts Necessary to explain or Introduce relevant Facts.

Evidence Law Page 5

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Following are the questions that were framed for research. Research work has come out with
fruitful riposte to all the questions.

Q1. What is the nature and purpose ofIndianEvidence Act?

Q2. What do we mean by facts under Indian Evidence Act?

Q3. WhatFacts are relevant under Indian Evidence Act?

Q4. What do we mean by Facts Necessary to explain or Introduce relevant Facts?

LIMITATION
The presented research is confined to a time limit of one month and this research contains
doctrinal works, which are limited to library and internet sources and empirical research.

Evidence Law Page 6

Evidence Law Page 7
 1. Introduction to Indian Evidence Act

Matters of proof are represented by the lex fori, for example the law of the gathering or court
wherein a case is attempted. If an observer is skilled, regardless of whether a specific matter
needs to be demonstrated by composing or not, if certain proof demonstrates a specific truth, are
all to be dictated by the law of the country where the inquiry emerges, for example where the
cure is tried to be upheld and where the Court sits to implement it. To ensure that the realities are
clear enough for the law to be applied, certain principles are followed to take out the chance of
conceding deception as reality or empowering exploitative method of getting or introducing the
proof. The law of proof comes in to fill the need. It is a meaningful law by which the courts
arrive at decision about current realities of the case and articulate decisions appropriately.

"Proof" signifies and incorporates (1) all explanations which the Court allows or needs to be
made before it by witnesses, comparable to issue of reality under request; such proclamations are
called oral evidence;(2) all reports delivered for the examination of the Court; such archives are
called narrative proof.

The charged in a criminal case is captured under the IPC and the methodology is followed under
the Criminal Procedure Code by both the police and the court however the court prosecutes
based on proof delivered against the blamed under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. This law
characterizes the court, certainty, archives, proof and assumptions, pertinence of realities,
affirmation of procedures, verification of realities, oral proof, narrative proof, creation and
impact of proof, weight of confirmation, estoppels, witnesses and the assessment of witnesses.
The law of proof additionally manages the inappropriate affirmation and dismissal of proof.
Alongside the Indian Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code the law of proof assumes a
crucial part in the organization of equity in criminal settling.
Applicability of the Act
When India gained independence on 15 August 1947, the Act continued to be in force throughout
the Republic of India and Pakistan, except the state of Jammu and Kashmir.Then, the Act
continues in force in India, but it was repealed in Pakistan in 1984 by the Evidence Order 1984

Evidence Law Page 8

(also known as the "Qanun-e-Shahadat").1 It also applies to all judicial proceedings in the court,
including the court martial. However, it does not apply on affidavits and arbitration.

Contents2
This Act is divided into three parts and there are 11 chapters in total under this Act.

Part 1
Part 1 deals with relevancy of the facts. There are two chapters under this part: the first chapter is
a preliminary chapter which introduces to the Evidence Act and the second chapter specifically
deals with the relevancy of the facts.

Part 2
Part 2 consists of chapters from 3 to 6. Chapter 3 deals with facts which need not be proved,
chapter 4 deals with oral evidence, chapter 5 deals with documentary evidence and chapter 6
deals with circumstances when documentary evidence has been given preference over the oral
evidence.

Part 3
The last part, that is part 3, consists of chapter 7 to chapter 11. Chapter 7 talks about the burden
of proof. Chapter 8 talks about estoppel, chapter 9 talks about witnesses, chapter 10 talks about
examination of witnesses, and last chapter which is chapter 11 talks about improper admission
and rejection of evidence.

1
https://kanwarn.wordpress.com/2008/12/20/introduction-to-indian-evidence-act/
2
Indian Evidence Act, S. N. Mishra, Central Law Publication.
Evidence Law Page 9
 2. What do we mean by FACTS?
Under section 3 of Evidence Act first the terms Fact, Relevant Fact and Fact in issue are defined
in respect of evidence and later when it can be said to be proved, disproved and not proved is
discussed. Thus, while appreciating evidence in respect of any fact, relevant fact and fact in issue
the Court has to give its anxious consideration towards the peculiar facts of the case. There may
be several facts in a case before Court and among it some may be relevant or some may be fact
in issue. The Court has to first ascertain the facts, then it has to find out whether they are relevant
and then whether they are actually in issue. After ascertaining this, the Court shall examine the
fact and later by applying rules of evidence Court has to see that whether those facts are proved,
disprove or not proved.3
Section 3 says that one fact is said to be relevant to another when the one is connected with the
other in any of the ways referred to in the provisions of the Act relating to the relevancy of facts.
Section 5 to 55 deals with relevancy of facts. So, one fact will be relevant to another only when
the one is connected with the other in any of the ways referred in Section 5 to 55 and if it not so
connected, it cannot be a relevant fact.
In appreciation of evidence under section 3 of Indian Evidence Act, the Hon'ble Supreme Court
has illustrated some instances in Ganesh K. Gulve ...Vs... State of Maharashtra4in following
words;
“In order to appreciate the evidence, the Court is required to bear in mind the setup and
environment in which the crime is committed. The level of understanding of the witnesses. The
over jealousness of some of near relations to ensure that, everyone even remotely connected with
the crime be also convicted. Everyone's different way of narration of same facts. Etc.”
The term 'Fact' means an 'an existing thing’ But under Evidence Act, the meaning of the word is
not limited to only what is tangible and visible or, is in any way, the object of senses. The things
which we perceive are also facts. We are conscious of everything of which we perceive. 5 Thus
Section 3 of Indian Evidence Act categories fact into –
1) Physical facts- It means and includes anything, state of thing or relation of things, capable of
being perceived by senses. In other words, all facts which are subject to perception by bodily
senses are physical facts . They are also called external facts.
2) Psychological facts- The term psychological facts consist of two words ‘psychological’ and
3
https://www.srdlawnotes.com/2017/02/meaning-of-fact-and-concept-of-fact-in.html
4
AIR 2002 SC 3068
5
https://articlesonlaw.files.wordpress.com/
Evidence Law Page 10
‘facts’. In the popular concept term ‘fact’ means an existing thing. It does not refer to a mental
condition of which a person is conscious. But as defined in Indian Evidence Act 1872, the
meaning of the word ‘fact’ is not limited to only what is visible or, is in any way, the object of
senses. According to this definition, as it is also clear from illustrations, the statements, feelings,
opinion and state of mind are as much fact as any other fact which is tangible and visible or any
other circumstances of which, through the medium of senses we become aware.6
Illustration:
A horse, a man, are physical facts. This clause refers to external facts, the subject of perception
by five senses. That man holds a certain opinion, has a certain intention, acts in good faith or
fraudulently, or uses a particular word in a particular sense, or is or was at a specified time
conscious of a particular sensation, is a psychological fact. This refers to internal facts the subject
of consciousness, such as intention, fraud, good faith and knowledge.

6
Section 10, Indian Evidence Act
Evidence Law Page 11
 3.What Facts Are Relevant?
"Every fact that is legally relevant is also logically relevant but every logically relevant fact may
not be necessarily legally relevant."7

The Indian Evidence Act is very unique in nature. The Act not only regulates the procedure for
the admission of the evidence it also looks after which evidence will not be admissible under
Indian Evidence Act. Indian Evidence Act deals with two important terms that are:
1.evidence and
2.admissibility.
The admissibility has not been defined but it is based on the factor of relevancy which has been
defined. The relevancy is based on the section 5 and section 7 of the Indian Evidence Act.

The word relevant has two meanings. In one sense it means "connected" and in another
"admissible". According to Stephen, ‘relevancy’ means connection of events as cause and effect.
What is really meant by relevant fact is a fact that has a certain degree of probative force. The
connection may be traced either from cause to effect or from effect to cause. All facts are
relevant which exists in relation to cause or effect to the fact alleged to exist. This act does not
give any definition of word "relevant". It only lays down that a fact becomes relevant only when
it is connected with other facts in any of the ways referred to, in this Act relating to the relevancy
of facts. Under Chapter II, section 5 to 55 deal with the relevancy of facts. A fact in order to be
relevant fact must be connected with the fact in issue or with any other relevant fact in any of the
ways referred to in Sections 5 to 55. A fact not so connected is not a relevant fact. The scheme of
the Act seems to make all relevant facts admissible.

Logically relevant and legally relevant

The main problem in this regard is deciding which fact is legally relevant as well as logical in
nature. A fact may be logically relevant to a particular case but there is no guarantee that it will
be legally admissible in the courts. So all the evidences that are to be produced in the courts have
to pass two hurdles it has to be both:
1.logically relevant and
2.legally admissible at the same time.

7
Ambikacharan v. Kumuk Mohan[1928] AIR 893 
Evidence Law Page 12
When a fact is connected with another fact, it is logically relevant but it is relevant if the law
declares it to be relevant. If it is not declared by the law to be relevant, it is not admissible in
evidence. "Every fact that is legally relevant is also logically relevant but every logically relevant
fact may not be necessarily legally relevant." Under the Evidence Act, a fact is said to be relevant
to another when it is relevant under the provisions of Sections 6 to 55 of Evidence Act.8
Example in this regard would be the case of "State of UP v. Raj Narain" where it was shown
that not all relevant facts are admissible. The case of "Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar"is a
very important case which helps us to understand the concept of clearing the two hurdles and the
distinction between relevancy and admissibility. The force of the section lies in the last four
words where it is meant that relevancy is actually the test of admissibility. The Supreme Court in
this case said that in most cases the two words admissibility and relevancy are used
interchangeably with each other but their legal implication is very different because often
relevant facts such as communication between the spouses in marriage is important but not
legally admissible.
However, relevancy and admissibility are two different connotations. The basic difference
between them is:
1. The first and foremost distinction between the two is that admissibility of the evidence is
strictly based on the strict questions of law whereas the relevancy is not a question of law rather
it is based on the probability and the logic.
2. The next fundamental difference between the two is the basic feature of the two. That is
admissibility decides whether relevant evidence has to be admitted or not whereas the relevancy
declares whether the evidence is logically relevant to the facts of the given case.
Thus a fact may be logically relevant to a particular case but there is no guarantee that it will be
legally admissible in the courts. The admissibility of facts is the most important factor in
deciding whether a particular piece of evidence will help in solving the case. The question ofthe
admissibility of evidence is undoubtedly a question of law which is decided by the judge.
Admissibility is founded and based on law and not logic.9

8
Distinction between relevancy and admissibility by Prakhar Maheshwari
9
Lakshmandas Chaganlal Bhatia v. State [1968] 69 AIR 807 (Bom)
Evidence Law Page 13
 4. Facts Necessary to explain or Introduce Relevant Facts
Section 9 of the Evidence Act states that, Facts necessary to explain or introduce a fact in issue
or relevant fact, or which support or rebut an inference suggested by a fact in issue or relevant
fact, or which establish the identity of anything or person whose identity is relevant, or fix the
time or place at which any fact in issue or relevant fact happened, or which show the relation of
parties by whom any such fact was transacted, are relevant in so far as they are necessary for that
purpose. In other words, facts which are explanatory or introductory of a relevant fact are often
of considerable help in understanding the real nature of transaction, missing links, in leading up
to main fact, in establishing some connection, or, throwing light on the fact-in-issue.10

Section 9 dealing with large number of facts which are either introductory or explanatory in
nature, are relevant. These are as follows:

1. Facts which are necessary to explain a fact in issue or relevant fact.

2. Facts which are necessary to introduce a fact in issue or relevant fact.

3. Facts which support an inference or relent a fact in issue or relevant fact.

4. Facts which establish the identity of anything or person whose identity is relevant.

5. Facts which fix the time or place of the fact in issue.

6. Facts which show the relation of parties by which any fact was transacted.

1. Explanatory facts:

There are many pieces of evidence which have no meaning at all if considered separately, but
become relevant when consider in connection with some other facts. Such facts explain the fact
in issue or relevant fact. Illustrations (e) & (f).

Example:

10
Law of Evidence by Ratanlal & Dhirajlal page no.112
Evidence Law Page 14
A was tried for abducting a girl. Once during police investigation, the accused at that time was
loitering near police station. The girl suddenly found the accused and started to cry out to her
brother who told the police. The police arrested the accused. The statement of the girl is
explanatory.

2. Introductory facts:

Facts which are introductory of a relevant fact, are of great importance in understanding real
nature of transaction and being relevant. Thus, evidence is allowed of facts which are necessary
to introduce fact in issue or relevant fact. In a suit of libel evidence of person’s relation at the
time of alleged libel may be necessary to introduce the circumstances that led to libel.
Illustrations (a), (b), (d), (e) and (f) explain the introductory facts.

3. Facts supporting inference:

There are facts which are neither relevant as facts in issue nor as relevant facts but they support
the inference suggested by the facts in issue or relevant fact or contradict the facts in issue or
relevant fact.

Example:

A, after murder was seen running away from the village. Running away supports the inference
that the murder might have been caused by him. It is relevant.

Similarly, a group of men was charged of committing a dacoity. Prior to decoity the accused
were associated with the approver being relevant as supporting the statement of approver. Facts
contradictory to fact in issue or relevant facts are relevant under the section.

Facts rebut inference:

There are facts, which can rebut or contradict the inferences suggested by the facts in issue or
relevant fact [Illustration (e)], being relevant.

Evidence Law Page 15

4. Facts establishing identity of thing or person:

When the identity of thing is in question, every fact which will be helpful to identify the thing is
relevant.

Example:

In a robbery with murder case the house lady was called to identify the article of the deceased
and other belongings. Identification of the deceased can be made with the help of this clothes and
shoes. Identification of jewellery of victim by neighbour who attended a birth day is admissible.

Identification of person:

Identification of person has been dealt with under section 9 of the Evidence Act. When the
identity of a person is in question, identification by parents, wife or other relatives is relevant. In
any special case identification of a person can be made by bodily mark, sign or cut mark. There
are other means of identification by medical examinations, namely, examination of skeleton,
bones, age, voice, blood group etc. By experts the identification of any person may also be
possible, such as handwriting, finger print, foot print, photograph etc. Thus, identification of
person may be possible by various means and ways.

The test for identification is only to help the investigation agency. Where no family member of
the deceased identified the gold chain and ring belonging to deceased except the only person
who identified the same, who was the owner of the shop. It was held that no reliance could be
placed upon his evidence. It is a matter of common knowledge that bodies have uncanny sense of
identifying their own belongings particularly cannot be rejected for want of proper test
identifications. The possibility of wrong identification due to loss of memory cannot be
discounted. In an unnatural offence under sections 363 and 376. I.P.C. the victim girl of 6 years
identified the accused on the next day of offence which was proved by medical examination also.
Evidence of identification in court is substantive evidence.11

11
www.hanumant.com

Evidence Law Page 16

 5. Conclusions and Suggestions

The Indian Evidence Act is divided into three parts and there are 11 chapters in total under this
Act.
Under section 3 of Evidence Act first the terms Fact, Relevant Fact and Fact in issue are defined
in respect of evidence and later when it can be said to be proved, disproved and not proved is
discussed. Thus, while appreciating evidence in respect of any fact, relevant fact and fact in issue
the Court has to give its anxious consideration towards the peculiar facts of the case.Section 3 of
Indian Evidence Act categories fact into physical facts and psychological facts.

"Every fact that is legally relevant is also logically relevant but every logically relevant fact may
not be necessarily legally relevant."
Evidence Act deals with two important terms that are:
1.evidence and
2.admissibility.
The admissibility has not been defined but it is based on the factor of relevancy which has been
defined. The relevancy is based on the section 5 and section 7 of the Indian Evidence Act.
“In this project, we dealt with the terms logically relevant and legally relevant. To summarize:
logically relevant: the dictionary meaning of the term ‘relevancy’ is given as ‘the relation of
something to the matter at hand’, ‘pertinence’, ‘connection’, ‘materiality’ etc. If one fact is
connected to the other logically, it is called logical relevancy and it may be based on several
factors. For instance, if a severed dead body is found on a railway track, it can be inferred that
the death occurred because of the train running over the person. On a closer observation, it is
found that there is no hemorrhage near the body, the first inference is then replaced by another
inference that the person was killed elsewhere and the dead body was thrown on the railway
track to create the misleading impression that he was run over by the train. Here the inferences
are drawn on the basis of logic based on cause and effect. If two or more persons have committed
the offence at the same time and place, it can be inferred that they were acting with common
intention.

Legal relevance: while logical relevance is certainly an important factor in determining the
probative value of facts, it so happens that the facts may be connected to each other by varying
degrees of logical proximity and immediate causes and effects, and remote, indirect and even
conjectural causes and effects. Hence, the courts should let in only those facts which have a high
degree of probative value that would help the courts to decide one way or the other with
relatively greater certainty.

Consequently, the Evidence Act adopted the device of declaring as relevant in section 6 to 55
only those logically connected facts which are considered to have a high probative value. Thus,
facts which may be connected to each other so remotely that they cannot be considered to have
high probative value are kept outside the purview of the provisions of ss. 6 to 55. Facts legally
relevant under the Evidence Act means, simply, facts declared to be relevant under section 6 to
55 and this is part of the legislative and not judicial determination.”

Hence, all logically relevant facts are not legally relevant and all legally relevant facts may not
be logically relevant.

Evidence Law Page 17

Section 9 dealing with large number of facts which are either introductory or explanatory in
nature, are relevant.Section 9 of the Evidence Act states that, Facts necessary to explain or
introduce a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which support or rebut an inference suggested by a
fact in issue or relevant fact, or which establish the identity of anything or person whose identity
is relevant, or fix the time or place at which any fact in issue or relevant fact happened, or which
show the relation of parties by whom any such fact was transacted, are relevant in so far as they
are necessary for that purpose. In other words, facts which are explanatory or introductory of a
relevant fact are often of considerable help in understanding the real nature of transaction,
missing links, in leading up to main fact, in establishing some connection, or, throwing light on
the fact-in-issue.
There is a need of change in the provisions of Section 9 of Indian Evidence Act. As time is
passing by, the technological environment is becoming more advanced due to which a forge
evidence can be produced before court, so to avoid it there is a imminent need for a change in
the same because as societal environment changes our needs, law and order needs to be
changed in accordance with the societal environment.

Evidence Law Page 18

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

STATUTE
 The Constitution Of India
 The Indian Evidence Act 1872.
 The Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1973.
 The Indian Penal Code,1860

BOOKS

The Law Of Evidence by Ratanlal & Dhirajlal.

Textbook on the Indian Evidence Act by K.D Gaur

EVIDENCE (THE LAW OF EVIDENCE) by Batuk Lal

DATABASES REFERRED
 MANUPATRA
 SCCONLINE
 WESTLAW

WEBSITES REFERRED

www.legalcrystal.com
www.hanumant.com
www.manupatrafast.com
www.sccasesonline.com

Evidence Law Page 19