Old witness statements can never be used again once a case moves forward or a new case starts.

They can be reused if the witness is dead, missing, incapacitated, hidden by the other party, or too difficult to produce again—provided the parties and issues are essentially the same and the other side had a real chance to cross-examine earlier.

This section lets any old statement from any proceeding be used freely.

It only applies to formal evidence given in a judicial proceeding or before someone legally authorised to record it, and strict conditions like same parties and prior cross-examination must be satisfied.

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

Section 27

Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, truth of facts therein

Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to§

take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable: Provided that the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest; that the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine and the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding. Explanation.—A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of this section. Statements made under special circumstances§

Why this exists

This provision continues the rule earlier found in Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Courts recognised that insisting on live testimony every single time is impractical—witnesses die, disappear, fall ill, or become impossible to trace due to time and cost. At the same time, letting in old testimony without safeguards could be unfair to the other side. So the law allows reuse of prior sworn testimony only when strict conditions are met: the parties (or those representing their interests) must be the same, the issues substantially similar, and crucially, the opposing party must have already had a genuine opportunity to cross-examine the witness the first time. This balances efficiency in the justice system against the fundamental right to test evidence through cross-examination.

Common misconceptions

Myth: Old witness statements can never be used again once a case moves forward or a new case starts.
Fact: They can be reused if the witness is dead, missing, incapacitated, hidden by the other party, or too difficult to produce again—provided the parties and issues are essentially the same and the other side had a real chance to cross-examine earlier.
Myth: This section lets any old statement from any proceeding be used freely.
Fact: It only applies to formal evidence given in a judicial proceeding or before someone legally authorised to record it, and strict conditions like same parties and prior cross-examination must be satisfied.