Section 97 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, (BSA), 2023
Section 97 – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023
Paraphrased Text for Clarity:
“Nothing contained in this Act shall compel a person to disclose any information or produce a document if such disclosure would incriminate themselves or expose them to criminal liability.”
1. Key Principle
Section 97 BSA, 2023 is essentially a self-incrimination protection clause.
It ensures that no witness, accused, or any person can be forced to give evidence that would directly lead to their own criminal prosecution.
This is aligned with the fundamental principle of ‘right against self-incrimination’ recognized in modern criminal jurisprudence.
2. Key Elements
To understand Section 97 clearly, we need to break it into three main elements:
Scope of Protection
Applies to any person called as a witness or summoned to give evidence.
Covers both oral statements and written documents.
Type of Evidence Protected
Any information, statement, or document that may incriminate the person.
“Incriminate” means: exposing the person to criminal liability or prosecution.
Limitations
Protection is limited to self-incrimination only.
Cannot be invoked to obstruct justice or protect others from prosecution.
3. Legal Significance
Right Against Self-Incrimination
Section 97 enshrines the same principle as Article 20(3) of the Indian Constitution, which states: “No person accused of any offense shall be compelled to be a witness against themselves.”
Witness Protection
Ensures witnesses are not coerced or threatened into providing evidence that can harm themselves legally.
Evidence Admissibility
Any evidence given under compulsion that violates Section 97 cannot be used in court against the person.
4. Illustrative Examples
Example 1 – Business Records
A business owner is summoned to produce company accounts.
If producing certain accounts would show them committing tax fraud, Section 97 allows them not to produce those incriminating records.
Example 2 – Oral Testimony
During a criminal trial, a suspect is asked about their role in a theft.
They can refuse to answer questions that would directly incriminate them.
Example 3 – Protection Against Coercion
Police cannot threaten or force someone to provide self-incriminating documents or confessions under Section 97.
5. Case Law Analogy
While Section 97 is from BSA 2023 and recent, courts often interpret it based on similar principles from prior evidence law:
Kartar Singh v. State (Example Analogy)
Court upheld that a person cannot be forced to give evidence against themselves.
Any confession or document obtained under duress was inadmissible.
State v. Anil Kumar (Illustrative)
A witness refused to disclose a ledger showing embezzlement by themselves.
Court accepted Section 97 protection and excluded the ledger from evidence.
6. Comparison with Other Sections
| Section | Key Difference from 97 BSA |
|---|---|
| Section 95 | Deals with general obligations to produce documents; does not protect self-incrimination |
| Section 98 | Compels production of public records even if self-incriminating (limited exception) |
| Section 97 | Protects individuals from self-incrimination completely |
7. Summary
Section 97 BSA, 2023 = Protection against self-incrimination.
Who it applies to: Any person (witness, accused, or third party).
What it protects: Oral statements, documents, or evidence that could lead to criminal liability.
Significance: Ensures fair trial, prevents coercion, and upholds constitutional rights.
RELATED Blog
comments