​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Judgments, etc., Other Than Those Mentioned in Sections 34, 35 and 36, When Relevant (Section 37)
​
1. Basic Principle of Section 37
Under Section 37 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, the law lays down a general rule regarding judgments:
Judgments, orders, or decrees other than those referred to in Sections 34, 35, and 36 are generally irrelevant.
However, this rule is not absolute. Such judgments may become relevant in two situations:

• When the existence of the judgment itself is a fact in issue, or
• When the judgment is relevant under some other provision of the Adhiniyam

2. Scope of the ProvisionThis section establishes a general rule of exclusion, meaning:

• Judgments not covered under Sections 34–36 cannot normally be relied upon
• Courts must avoid being influenced by decisions in unrelated cases

👉 The principle ensures:

• Each case is decided on its own merits
• No undue reliance is placed on previous findings involving different parties

3. Illustrations Explained(a) Libel Cases

• A and B separately sue C for defamation
• A wins damages because C fails to prove truth

👉 This judgment is irrelevant in B’s case against C
✔ Reason: Different proceedings, separate claims

(b) Theft and Subsequent Civil Suit

• A prosecutes B for stealing a cow → B is convicted
• A later sues C (who bought the cow from B)

👉 B’s conviction is irrelevant in A’s case against C
✔ Reason: Criminal judgment against B does not bind C

(c) Judgment Showing Motive

• A obtains a decree for land against B
• C (B’s son) murders A

👉 The existence of the decree is relevant
✔ Reason: It helps establish motive for the crime

(d) Previous Conviction

• A is charged with theft and prior conviction is alleged

👉 Previous conviction is relevant
✔ Reason: It is itself a fact in issue

(e) Prior Litigation Showing Motive

• A is tried for murdering B
• B had earlier prosecuted A for libel

👉 The earlier judgment is relevant
✔ Reason: It helps prove motive under another provision (e.g., facts explaining conduct)

4. Exceptions to the General RuleAlthough judgments are generally irrelevant, two main exceptions apply:
(i) When Judgment is a Fact in Issue

• If the purpose is to prove:
  • Existence of the judgment
  • Date or legal effect

👉 Then it becomes relevant
Example:
If A sues B for malicious prosecution after acquittal, the earlier judgment of acquittal is relevant to prove that fact.

(ii) When Relevant Under Other ProvisionsA judgment may be admitted if it becomes relevant through another rule, such as:

• Motive
• Conduct
• Other connecting facts

Example:
A decree of eviction may be used to show motive for murder.

5. Key Legal Principle👉 Judgments are not evidence of the truth of facts decided in them unless the law specifically makes them relevant.

6. Purpose of Section 37

• Prevents:
  • Misuse of judgments from unrelated cases
  • Prejudice against parties
• Ensures:
  • Fair trial
  • Independent judicial reasoning

7. Key Takeaways

• General rule → Judgments (outside Sections 34–36) are irrelevant
• Exceptions:
  • Judgment itself is in issue
  • Judgment is relevant under another provision
• Promotes fairness and independence in adjudication

One-Line Summary👉 Judgments not covered under Sections 34–36 are generally irrelevant, unless their existence is directly in issue or they become relevant under another provision of law.