Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 3
Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts
Evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence or non-existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others. Explanation.—This section shall not enable any person to give evidence of a fact which he is disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force relating to civil procedure. Illustrations.
(a) A is tried for the murder of B by beating him with a club with the intention of causing his death. At A’s trial the following facts are in issue:— A’s beating B with the club; A’s causing B’s death by such beating; A’s intention to cause B’s death.
(b) A suitor does not bring with him, and have in readiness for production at the first hearing of the case, a bond on which he relies. This section does not enable him to produce the bond or prove its contents at a subsequent stage of the proceedings, otherwise than in accordance with the conditions prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908). Closely connected facts
Why this exists
This provision (carried forward from Section 5 of the old Indian Evidence Act, 1872) exists to keep trials focused and efficient. Without such a rule, parties could flood courts with endless evidence on irrelevant matters, making trials unpredictable and unfair. By limiting evidence strictly to 'facts in issue' and facts declared 'relevant' elsewhere in the Act, the law creates a disciplined framework for what a judge may even consider, and prevents this section from being misused to bypass other procedural safeguards like the Civil Procedure Code.
How courts read it
Indian courts have long treated this as a foundational, almost architectural provision — it doesn't create relevance itself but sets the boundary: only facts in issue and facts made relevant by other sections (like those on motive, conduct, or res gestae) can come into evidence. Courts have consistently held that irrelevant or extraneous facts, however interesting, must be excluded to keep trials fair and focused, and have used the illustration about the bond to reinforce that procedural deadlines under the CPC cannot be sidestepped using evidence law.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: This section lets you introduce any evidence at any time, as long as it's true.
Fact: The section only allows evidence on facts in issue or facts declared relevant elsewhere in the Act — and it doesn't override procedural deadlines under other laws like the Civil Procedure Code. - Myth: 'Relevant facts' means anything a lawyer thinks is relevant.
Fact: 'Relevant facts' has a specific technical meaning — only facts that other sections of this Act declare relevant qualify, not just anything a party considers important.