Relevancy of Character in Evidence Act
The concept of "relevancy of character" under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (and similarly in other common law jurisdictions) plays an important role in determining what kind of character evidence can be admitted in court proceedings.
🔷 General Rule: Section 52 of the Indian Evidence Act
Section 52 – In civil cases, character to prove conduct imputed irrelevant.
It states that in civil cases, a party's character is not relevant to prove that they acted in conformity with that character on a particular occasion.
🔶 Key Provisions Regarding Character Evidence:
| Section | Provision | Relevance |
|---|---|---|
| S. 52 | Exclusion of character evidence in civil cases | Prevents parties from attacking each other's general character to prove conduct. |
| S. 53 | In criminal cases, good character of the accused is relevant | Accused can introduce evidence of good character. |
| S. 54 | In criminal cases, bad character of the accused is not relevant unless evidence of good character is given | Prosecution can't lead with bad character unless the accused opens the door. |
| S. 55 | Character relevant when damages are claimed | In both civil and criminal cases, character is relevant to the quantum of damages. |
🔹 Explanation:
Criminal Cases:
Good character may be used by the defense to support innocence (Section 53).
Bad character generally cannot be used by the prosecution unless:
The accused has introduced good character evidence (Section 54).
The character itself is in issue (e.g., habitual offender, under special laws).
Civil Cases:
Character evidence is generally inadmissible to prove or disprove conduct (Section 52).
Exception: When character affects damages (Section 55).
🔸 Practical Examples:
In a murder trial, the accused may bring witnesses to show he is of a peaceful character (S.53).
If the accused does that, the prosecution can rebut it by showing instances of past violence (S.54).
In a defamation suit, the plaintiff’s character may be examined to assess the amount of damages (S.55).
🔹 Case Laws:
K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra (1961) – Accused's good character was taken into account, as allowed by Section 53.
Subramaniam v. State of Tamil Nadu (2009) – Held that bad character cannot be introduced unless the accused puts his character in issue.
✅ Conclusion:
The relevancy of character in the Indian Evidence Act strikes a balance between protecting individuals from unfair prejudice and allowing character to be considered when directly relevant, especially in criminal cases and assessment of damages. Courts are cautious in admitting character evidence due to its potential to mislead or bias the jury or judge.
Do write to us if you need any further assistance.
RELATED Blog
0 comments