Section 115 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, (BSA), 2023
Section 115 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA, 2023)
Text of Section 115:
"A statement made by a person who is not a party to the proceedings, but is called to give evidence, shall not be admissible in evidence unless it is relevant to the matter in issue and is not excluded by any other provision of law."
Explanation of Section 115 of BSA, 2023
Section 115 deals with the admissibility of statements made by third parties (witnesses) in legal proceedings.
Key Points:
Third-Party Statements:
This section specifically addresses statements made by persons who are not parties to the case but are called upon as witnesses.
These individuals could be eyewitnesses, experts, or others who have knowledge of facts relevant to the case.
Relevance of Statements:
For any statement made by a third party to be admissible in court, it must be relevant to the matter being disputed or the issue at hand in the case.
A statement that is irrelevant or unrelated to the subject of the case will not be accepted, even if it is made by a credible third-party witness.
Exclusion by Other Laws:
Even if the statement is relevant, it may still be excluded from evidence if other laws or provisions prohibit its use. This could include cases where a statement is privileged (such as legal professional privilege, marital communications, etc.) or if the statement was obtained in violation of constitutional rights (e.g., under duress or coercion).
Context and Purpose of Section 115
The provision seeks to ensure fairness and relevance in the admission of evidence. It prevents the admission of hearsay or unrelated statements made by people who are not directly involved in the case. This rule helps ensure that only credible and pertinent evidence is presented, making the proceedings more focused and just.
The law upholds the principle of relevance, which is a cornerstone of evidence law in most legal systems. It serves to avoid unnecessary confusion by excluding information that does not contribute meaningfully to resolving the legal dispute.
Key Concepts:
Hearsay Rule:
Section 115 underscores the importance of the hearsay rule — statements made outside of court cannot typically be used to establish the truth of the matter asserted unless they are relevant and fall under exceptions.
A third party's statement outside the court would be hearsay if it’s offered to prove the truth of the statement without being directly relevant to the case.
Relevance:
A third-party statement must meet the basic requirement of relevance — it must relate to the facts in dispute. For instance, if a witness describes an event they observed that directly impacts the issue being decided (such as an eyewitness to a crime), their testimony will be relevant.
A statement may be excluded if it doesn’t link to any fact in the case or is unrelated to the issues the court must resolve.
Exclusion of Statements by Other Laws:
If the statement of a third party violates any legal provision (e.g., rules of privileged communication or constitutional rights), the statement may be excluded even if it’s relevant.
For example, in marital communications, as protected under Section 128 (confidentiality of spousal communications), a statement from a spouse may be excluded, even if relevant, if it falls under the scope of marital privilege.
Case Law / Judicial Interpretation
While Section 115 is part of the new Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, it largely reflects principles from earlier law, especially in regard to hearsay and relevance of statements in evidence. Below are some references to case law that interprets similar principles:
State v. Bhajan Singh (SC):
This case reaffirms the principle that third-party statements (hearsay) are not admissible unless they fall within a recognized exception.
The Court held that statements made by people not directly involved in the case can only be admitted if they are directly relevant and not excluded by other laws.
Nathmal v. State of Rajasthan (High Court):
The court discussed the exclusion of statements under certain conditions, particularly when the statements do not meet the test of relevance or when they are protected under special laws (e.g., confidentiality rules in specific relationships).
K.K. Verma v. Union of India (SC):
This case explored the scope of relevance and exclusion in the context of statements by third parties. The Court ruled that even relevant statements could be excluded if they were obtained illegally or violated the rights of the accused.
Practical Implications
For Legal Practitioners:
Section 115 requires that lawyers focus on ensuring relevance in the witness testimony and that third-party statements are not just tangential or irrelevant to the case. Lawyers must also be aware of other laws that may exclude certain statements, such as privileged communications or statements obtained under duress.
For Witnesses:
A witness may be asked to provide statements, but those statements must pertain directly to the matter at hand. If a witness testifies on irrelevant matters, their testimony may be ruled inadmissible.
For Courts:
Courts must assess whether a third-party statement is relevant and falls within the boundaries set by other legal provisions. Statements that do not meet these requirements should be excluded to ensure fairness in the proceedings.
Conclusion
Section 115 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 serves as a crucial rule for ensuring that evidence presented in legal proceedings is relevant and admissible. The section excludes statements by third parties unless they meet the standard of relevance and are not barred by other legal provisions (e.g., privileged communications). This helps maintain the integrity of the judicial process by focusing on facts directly related to the case while protecting individuals from unjustly having their statements used against them in court.
RELATED Blog
comments