​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Cases in Which Statement of Relevant Fact by Person Who is Dead or Cannot Be Found, etc., is Relevant (Section 26)

1. Basic Principle of Section 26
​Section 26 deals with situations where a statement made by a person becomes relevant even though that person cannot be produced before the court.
Normally, evidence must be direct and the maker of the statement should appear in court for examination and cross-examination. However, Section 26 creates an exception where the maker is:

• Dead
• Cannot be found
• Incapable of giving evidence
• Unable to attend without unreasonable delay or expense

In such cases, written or verbal statements of relevant facts made by that person may themselves become relevant.

2. Scope of Section 26
Section 26 is based on two principles:
(i) NecessityThe maker of the statement is unavailable, so the court allows the statement to avoid failure of justice.
(ii) ReliabilityCertain statements are considered naturally trustworthy because of the circumstances in which they were made.

3. Categories of Statements under Section 26
Section 26 recognizes the following types of statements:
(a) Dying DeclarationStatements relating to:

• Cause of death, or
• Circumstances of the transaction resulting in death

These are relevant when the cause of death is in question.

(b) Statements in Course of BusinessStatements made in the ordinary course of business or professional duty.
Examples:

• Diary entries
• Business records
• Medical reports
• Acknowledgments of receipt
• Commercial documents

(c) Statements Against Interest
Statements are relevant when they are against the maker’s:

• Pecuniary interest
• Proprietary interest
• Civil liability
• Criminal liability

The reason is that a person is unlikely to make a false statement against his own interest.

(d) Statements as to Public Right or Custom
Statements expressing opinion about:

• Public rights
• Customs
• Matters of general or public interest

These must be made before any dispute arose.

(e) Statements Relating to Relationship
Statements about relationship by:

• Blood
• Marriage
• Adoption

The maker must have special means of knowledge and the statement must be made before dispute.

(f) Statements in Wills, Deeds, Pedigrees, Tombstones, etc.
Statements relating to relationship between deceased persons are relevant when contained in:

• Wills
• Deeds
• Family pedigrees
• Tombstones
• Family portraits

(g) Statements in Documents Relating to Transactions
Statements contained in deeds, wills, or other documents relating to transactions under Section 11(a) are relevant.

(h) Statements by Several Persons Expressing Feelings
Statements made by a group of persons expressing common feelings or impressions are relevant when connected to the matter in issue.

A. Dying Declaration1. Meaning of Dying Declaration
A dying declaration is a statement made by a person about:

• The cause of his death, or
• The circumstances of the transaction resulting in his death

It becomes relevant when the cause of that person’s death is in question.

2. Rationale
The principle is expressed in the maxim:
“Nemo moriturus praesumitur mentiri”Meaning:
A person who is about to die is not presumed to lie.
The law assumes that a person facing death is unlikely to make a false statement. Since the victim may be the only direct witness, excluding such a statement may defeat justice.

3. Important Features

• It may be oral, written, or by signs/gestures
• It need not be made in expectation of death
• It may be used in civil or criminal proceedings
• It is an exception to hearsay evidence
• It can be the sole basis of conviction if reliable

4. “Verbal” is Wider than “Oral”
A dying declaration need not always be spoken.
In Queen Empress v Abdullah, the deceased could not speak because her throat was cut. She answered questions through gestures. The court held that signs and gestures can amount to a verbal statement.
Thus:

• Oral = spoken by mouth
• Verbal = words, signs, gestures, or any clear communication

5. Mode of Making Dying Declaration
A dying declaration may be made:

• Orally
• In writing
• By gestures
• By nods
• By signs
• Through any definite communication

In Mukesh v NCT of Delhi, the victim’s statement through gestures was accepted because she was conscious and medically fit to respond.

6. Who May Record a Dying Declaration
A dying declaration may be recorded by:

• Magistrate
• Doctor
• Police officer
• Any person present

However, a declaration recorded by a Magistrate usually carries higher evidentiary value.
In State of Jharkhand v Shailendra Kumar Rai, the Supreme Court held that a dying declaration does not become inadmissible merely because it was recorded by a police officer.

7. Form of Recording
There is no fixed legal form.
Preferably, it should be:

• In question-and-answer form
• In the exact words of the maker
• In the language of the maker
• Recorded after ensuring mental fitness

But absence of any one formality does not automatically make it invalid.

8. Evidentiary Value
A dying declaration is substantive evidence.
It may form the sole basis of conviction if the court is satisfied that it is:

• Voluntary
• Truthful
• Consistent
• Free from tutoring
• Made by a person in fit mental condition

Corroboration is not mandatory, but the court may seek it if the declaration appears doubtful.

9. Key Principles on Dying Declaration(i) Sole Basis of Conviction
In Khushal Rao v State of Bombay, the Supreme Court held that a reliable dying declaration can form the sole basis of conviction without corroboration.
(ii) If Victim SurvivesIf the maker survives, the statement is no longer a dying declaration. It may be used only for contradiction or corroboration.
(iii) Incomplete Dying DeclarationAn incomplete dying declaration may still be relied upon if it clearly identifies the accused and the cause of death.
(iv) Multiple Dying DeclarationsWhere there are several dying declarations, each must be examined independently. If inconsistencies are material, the court must act cautiously.
(v) VideographyVideography is a precautionary measure. Absence of videography does not automatically invalidate the dying declaration.

10. Multiple Dying Declarations – Note Form
When there are multiple dying declarations, the court should examine:

• Whether each statement was voluntary
• Whether the maker was mentally fit
• Whether inconsistencies are material
• Whether statements are supported by medical evidence
• Whether one statement is more reliable than another
• Whether the declaration recorded by Magistrate appears trustworthy

11. Interested Witnesses
​Evidence of interested witnesses is not automatically rejected. However, it must be carefully scrutinized.
If reliable and credible, it can be accepted. If doubtful, corroboration may be required.

12. Key Takeaways

• Section 26 is an exception to the rule against hearsay
• It applies when the maker is unavailable
• Dying declaration is the most important category under this section
• A dying declaration may be oral, written, or by gestures
• It can form the sole basis of conviction if reliable
• Courts must examine voluntariness, truthfulness, fitness, and absence of tutoring

One-Line Summary👉 Section 26 allows statements of unavailable persons to be admitted in special cases, especially dying declarations, where necessity and reliability justify departure from the ordinary rule of direct evidence.

​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Declaration in Course of Business (Section 26(b))
1. Basic Principle of Section 26(b)Under Section 26(b) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, the law provides that:
Statements made by a person in the ordinary course of business or professional duty are relevant, when the maker is dead or cannot be called as a witness.

2. Underlying Principle👉 Statements made in the routine course of business are presumed to be reliable.

• Reason:
  • Made:
    • Regularly and systematically
    • Without motive to misrepresent

3. Scope of the Provision

• Applies to:
  • Business records
  • Professional reports
  • Routine entries

👉 Includes:

• Medical records
• Account entries
• Official notes

4. Essential Conditions (Note Form)For admissibility under Section 26(b):

• ✔ Unavailability of Maker
  • Person must be:
    • Dead, or
    • Cannot be found, or
    • Otherwise unavailable
• ✔ Course of Business
  • Statement must be made:
    • In ordinary course of business or duty
• ✔ Duty to Make Statement
  • Maker must:
    • Be under a duty to make such statement

5. Evidentiary Value

• ✔ Statements are:
  • Relevant evidence
• ✔ May be:
  • Substantive evidence

👉 Higher value than:

• Ordinary business entries under Section 28

6. Illustration from Case LawIn State v Rakesh Pal Singh:

• Injury report prepared by doctor
• Doctor unavailable (gone abroad)

👉 Compounder proved:

• Report was:
  • Made in course of duty
  • Signed by doctor

✔ Court held:

• Injury report:
  • Admissible under Section 26(b)

7. Key Legal Principle👉 Statements made in the ordinary course of business by an unavailable person are admissible due to their inherent reliability.

8. Purpose of Section 26(b)

• Avoids:
  • Failure of justice due to:
    • Absence of witness
• Recognizes:
  • Practical importance of:
    • Routine records

9. Key Takeaways

• Section 26(b) deals with:
  • Business/professional statements
• Conditions:
  • Made in course of duty
  • Maker unavailable
• Value:
  • ✔ Reliable
  • ✔ Substantive evidence

One-Line Summary👉 Statements made in the ordinary course of business by an unavailable person are relevant and admissible due to their reliability.


KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Declaration Against the Interest of the Maker (Section 26(c))
1. Basic Principle of Section 26(c)Under Section 26(c) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam**, the law provides that:
A statement made by a person who is dead or unavailable is relevant if it is against his own pecuniary, proprietary, or legal interest.

2. Underlying Principle👉 People do not normally make statements harmful to themselves unless they are true.

3. Essential Conditions (Note Form)

• ✔ Maker must be:
  • Dead or unavailable
• ✔ Must have:
  • Personal knowledge
• ✔ Statement must:
  • Be against:
    • Financial interest
    • Property interest
    • Legal liability
• ✔ Maker must:
  • Be aware of its prejudicial nature

4. Case IllustrationIn Bhim Singh v Kan Singh:

• Deceased admitted:
  • Property intended for another person

✔ Court held:

• Statement:
  • Against proprietary interest
  • Hence relevant

5. Key Difference (Quick Note)AspectSection 26(b)Section 26(c)NatureBusiness statementStatement against interest
BasisRoutine reliabilitySelf-damaging truth
ValueSubstantive evidenceStrong substantive evidence
6. One-Line Summary👉 Business statements rely on routine accuracy, while statements against interest rely on human tendency not to speak against oneself unless true.

​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Declaration Against the Interest of the Maker (Section 26(c))
​
1. Basic Principle of Section 26(c)Under Section 26(c) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, the law provides that:
A statement made by a person who is dead or unavailable is relevant if it is against his own interest, i.e., it:

• Affects his pecuniary or proprietary interest, OR
• Exposes him to civil or criminal liability

2. Underlying Principle👉 A person would not normally make a statement against his own interest unless it is true.

• Such statements are considered:
  • Trustworthy and reliable

3. Essential Conditions (Note Form)For admissibility under Section 26(c):

• ✔ Unavailability of Maker
  • Person must be:
    • Dead or cannot be found
• ✔ Personal Knowledge
  • Maker must have:
    • Direct knowledge of the facts
• ✔ Statement Against Interest
  • Must:
    • Harm his own:
      • Financial (pecuniary) interest
      • Property (proprietary) interest
      • Legal position (civil/criminal liability)
• ✔ Awareness
  • Maker must:
    • Know that statement is against his interest

4. Types of Interests Covered

• Pecuniary Interest
  • Financial loss or liability
• Proprietary Interest
  • Ownership or property rights
• Legal Liability
  • Exposure to:
    • Civil or criminal consequences

5. Illustration from Case LawIn Bhim Singh v Kan Singh:

• Deceased admitted:
  • Property was purchased in another’s name
  • Intended to make him real owner

👉 Court held:

• Statement was:
  • ✔ Against proprietary interest
  • ✔ Therefore relevant evidence

6. Correlation with Section 19 (Important Note)Section 19 (Self-Serving Statements)

• Generally:
  • ❌ Not admissible in favour of maker

Exception via Section 26(c)

• If statement:
  • Is against interest

👉 Then:

• ✔ Admissible:
  • In favour of:
    • Maker
    • Representative
    • Third parties

7. Evidentiary Value

• ✔ Treated as:
  • Substantive evidence

👉 Because:

• It carries:
  • Inherent reliability

8. Key Legal Principle👉 A declaration against interest is admissible because it is unlikely that a person would falsely make a statement detrimental to himself.

9. Purpose of Section 26(c)

• Recognizes:
  • Statements made under:
    • Natural human conduct
• Provides:
  • Reliable evidence when:
    • Maker is unavailable

10. Key Takeaways

• Section 26(c) deals with:
  • Statements against interest
• Conditions:
  • Personal knowledge
  • Awareness of prejudice
• Value:
  • ✔ Highly reliable
  • ✔ Substantive evidence

One-Line Summary👉 Statements made by an unavailable person against his own pecuniary, proprietary, or legal interest are relevant and considered reliable evidence.

​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Confession Caused by Inducement, Threat, Coercion or Promise (Section 22)
1. Basic Rule

• Confession must be free and voluntary
• If obtained by:
  • Inducement
  • Threat
  • Coercion
  • Promise
    👉 It becomes irrelevant in criminal proceedings

2. Core Conditions for IrrelevancyConfession is inadmissible if ALL are present:

1. There is inducement / threat / coercion / promise
2. It is made by person in authority
3. It relates to the charge against the accused
4. It offers:
   • Advantage, or
   • Avoidance of harm (temporal benefit)

3. Meaning of Key Elements(a) Person in Authority

• Someone in a position of power or influence
• Example:
  • Police officer
  • Magistrate
  • Employer (in some cases)

(b) Inducement Must Relate to Charge

• Must be connected to offence in question
• Not valid if:
  • Threat/promise relates to other matters

(c) Temporal Benefit

• Must involve:
  • Worldly/material gain or loss
• Not sufficient:
  • Moral or spiritual advice

✔ Example:

• “Tell truth, God will forgive you” → valid confession

4. Proviso 1 – Removal of Influence

• Confession becomes relevant again if:
  • Effect of inducement/threat is fully removed
• Court must be satisfied that:
  • Mind is free and voluntary

5. Proviso 2 – Situations Where Confession Still ValidConfession not invalid merely because:

1. Promise of secrecy
2. Deception used
3. Accused was drunk
4. Answer to questions not bound to answer
5. No warning given

👉 As long as confession is voluntary

6. Important Distinction

• Voluntariness = Key test
• Not method, not form, not circumstances alone

7. Case Principle (Veera Ibrahim Case)

• Statement was:
  • Not a confession → only admission
• Section 22 applies only to confession, not all statements

8. Essentials to Apply Section 22Court must check:

1. Statement is a confession
2. Made by accused person
3. Made to person in authority
4. Caused by inducement/threat/promise
5. Related to charge
6. Creates reasonable belief of benefit or harm

9. Key Takeaways

• Confession must be free, voluntary, and uninfluenced
• Any improper influence → inadmissible
• Once influence removed → confession becomes valid
• Law focuses on fairness and reliability

Quick Revision Line👉 A confession obtained by pressure is rejected; only a free and voluntary confession is admissible.

​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Confession to Police Officer (Section 23) 
1. General Rule

• Confession to police officer → NOT admissible
• Based on:
  • Risk of coercion / torture
  • Lack of reliability

2. Section 23 – Core Provisions(1) Confession to Police

• No confession made to a police officer
  👉 Cannot be proved against the accused

(2) Confession in Police Custody

• Confession made while in police custody
  👉 Not admissible
  ❗ Exception:
• If made in immediate presence of Magistrate

(3) Proviso (Discovery Exception)

• If information from accused leads to discovery
  👉 Only that part of statement is admissible
• Applies whether it is confession or not

3. Rationale (Why Confessions to Police Are Excluded)

• Prevent third-degree methods
• Ensure fair investigation
• Protect accused from coercion
• Based on public policy

4. Meaning of “Police Officer”

• Determined by powers, not designation
• Must have:
  • Power to investigate, and
  • Power to file police report (charge sheet)

5. Confession vs Non-Confession

• Only confessional statements are barred
• Non-confessional statements:
  • Can be admissible
  • May be used as admission

6. Confessional FIR

• Only:
  • Non-confessional part → admissible
  • Discovery-related part → admissible
• Confessional part → ❌ Not admissible

7. Meaning of Police Custody

• Not limited to jail
• Includes:
  • Any form of police control
• Even:
  • Open space
  • Travel situation
  • Temporary absence of police → still custody

8. Confession in Custody

• Wide meaning:
  • Physical restraint OR
  • Mental control by police
• Example:
  • Confession to third person while under police control → ❌ inadmissible

9. Role of Magistrate

• Confession valid if:
  • Made in immediate presence of Magistrate
• Reason:
  • Ensures voluntariness
  • Removes fear of coercion

10. Proviso to Section 23 – Key ConceptDoctrine: Confirmation by Subsequent Events

• Discovery of fact = guarantee of truth

11. Conditions for Applying ProvisoAll must be satisfied:

1. Fact discovered due to information
2. Accused must be:
   • In custody
   • Accused of offence
3. Only relevant portion admissible
4. Discovery must be proved by witness
5. Fact must relate to crime

12. “Distinctly Related” – Meaning

• Only that part which:
  • Directly leads to discovery
• Excludes:
  • Indirect or unrelated parts

13. Meaning of “Fact Discovered”Includes:

• Physical object
• Place of discovery
• Knowledge of accused

14. Discovery Evidence

• Weak type of evidence
• Needs corroboration
• Cannot solely prove guilt

15. Disclosure Statement

• Shows:
  • Place of concealment
  • Knowledge of accused

16. Joint Disclosure

• Not automatically inadmissible
• But:
  • Reliability is questionable
• Courts treat with caution

17. Section 23 & Article 20(3)

• No violation if:
  • Statement is voluntary
• Violation only if:
  • Compulsion / coercion used

18. Key Judicial Principles

• Confession to police → completely barred
• Only discovery-based part → admissible
• Entire confession cannot be split except:
  • Under proviso

19. Important Takeaways

• Police confession = inadmissible
• Custodial confession = inadmissible
• Exception = Magistrate presence / discovery
• Discovery = partial admissibility
• Strong emphasis on fairness & protection of accused

Quick Revision Line👉 Confession to police is barred, but the truth revealed through discovery is allowed.

​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Declarations Giving Opinion as to Public Right or Custom or Matters of General Interest (Section 26(d))
​
1. Basic Principle of Section 26(d)Under Section 26(d) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, the law provides that:
Statements expressing opinions about public rights, customs, or matters of general interest are relevant, when made by a person who is unavailable as a witness, provided such statements were made before any dispute arose (ante litem motam).

2. Nature of Such Declarations

• These are:
  • Opinion-based statements
• Made by:
  • Persons who:
    • Are dead, or
    • Cannot be called as witnesses

👉 Concern:

• Public or community-related matters

3. Essential Conditions (Note Form)For admissibility under Section 26(d):

• ✔ Unavailability of Maker
  • Person must be:
    • Dead or otherwise unavailable
• ✔ Nature of Statement
  • Must be:
    • An expression of opinion
• ✔ Subject Matter
  • Must relate to:
    • Public right, OR
    • Custom, OR
    • Matter of general/public interest
• ✔ Knowledge Requirement
  • Person must be:
    • Likely to have knowledge of the subject
• ✔ Ante Litem Motam
  • Statement must be made:
    • Before dispute arose

4. Meaning of Key Terms(i) Public Right

• Rights enjoyed by:
  • All members of the public

👉 Example:

• Right to use public roads

(ii) General Right

• Rights affecting:
  • A considerable section of society
• (Linked to Section 42)

(iii) Custom

• A practice:
  • Accepted and followed over time
• Recognized by:
  • Community or group

5. Scope of the Provision

• Applies to:
  • Community-wide or public matters
• Does NOT apply to:
  • Private rights or titles

6. Important Limitation❌ Not applicable to:

• Private property disputes
• Family customs
• Individual rights

👉 Examples excluded:

• Boundary disputes of private land
• Private right of way
• Family customs

7. Evidentiary Value

• ✔ Statements are:
  • Relevant evidence

👉 Because:

• They reflect:
  • Long-standing public understanding

8. Key Legal Principle👉 Opinions about public rights or customs made before any dispute by knowledgeable but unavailable persons are admissible as relevant evidence.

9. Purpose of Section 26(d)

• Facilitates proof of:
  • Public rights and customs
• Recognizes:
  • Difficulty in producing direct evidence of:
    • Ancient or customary practices

10. Key Takeaways

• Section 26(d) deals with:
  • Opinion on public rights and customs
• Conditions:
  • Unavailable witness
  • Knowledge of subject
  • Ante litem motam
• Excludes:
  • Private rights

One-Line Summary👉 Opinions of unavailable persons regarding public rights or customs, made before dispute, are relevant evidence but do not apply to private rights.

​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Declaration Relating to Existence of Relationship (Section 26(e))
​
1. Basic Principle of Section 26(e)Under Section 26(e) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, the law provides that:
Statements made by a person who is dead or cannot be found, relating to the existence of relationship (by blood, marriage, or adoption), are relevant facts, provided certain conditions are fulfilled.

2. Nature of Such Statements

• Statements may be:
  • Oral, or
  • Written, such as:
    • Family correspondence
    • Recitals in deeds or wills
    • Pleadings or depositions
    • School registers

👉 These are accepted because:

• They often come from persons closely connected with the family

3. Essential Conditions (Note Form)For admissibility under Section 26(e):

• ✔ Unavailability of Maker
  • Person must be:
    • Dead, or
    • Cannot be found, or otherwise unavailable
• ✔ Subject Matter
  • Statement must relate to:
    • Relationship by:
      • Blood
      • Marriage
      • Adoption
• ✔ Special Means of Knowledge
  • Maker must have:
    • Special knowledge about the relationship
• ✔ Ante Litem Motam
  • Statement must be made:
    • Before any dispute arose

4. Meaning of “Special Means of Knowledge”

• Refers to:
  • Close family members
  • Persons directly connected with family affairs

👉 Example:

• Parents, relatives, guardians

5. Evidentiary Value

• ✔ Statements are:
  • Relevant evidence

👉 But:

• Weight depends on:
  • Reliability of source
  • Authenticity of record

6. Illustration from Case LawIn State of Punjab v Mohinder Singh:

• Horoscope was considered:
  • ❌ Weak evidence
• Reason:
  • Maker not available
  • No proof of special knowledge

👉 Held:

• Horoscope is inadmissible to prove age

7. Comparison of Evidence (Important Insight)

• School Register Entry
  • ✔ More reliable
  • Based on:
    • Information from parents/guardians
• Horoscope
  • ❌ Less reliable
  • Lacks:
    • Proven authenticity

👉 Therefore:

• School records have greater evidentiary value

8. Key Legal Principle👉 Statements relating to family relationships made by persons with special knowledge before any dispute are relevant, but their weight depends on reliability.

9. Purpose of Section 26(e)

• Facilitates proof of:
  • Family relationships
• Recognizes:
  • Difficulty in producing direct evidence

10. Key Takeaways

• Section 26(e) deals with:
  • Declarations about relationships
• Requirements:
  • Unavailable maker
  • Special knowledge
  • Ante litem motam
• Evidence:
  • ✔ Relevant
  • Depends on credibility

One-Line Summary👉 Statements made by unavailable persons with special knowledge about family relationships, before any dispute, are relevant evidence under Section 26(e).

​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Declaration Made in a Will or Deed Relating to Family Affairs (Section 26(f))
​
1. Basic Principle of Section 26(f)Under Section 26(f) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, the law provides that:
Statements made by a person who is dead or cannot be found, relating to the existence of family relationships (by blood, marriage, or adoption), are relevant if they are contained in:

• A will or deed relating to family affairs, OR
• A family pedigree, tombstone, family portrait, or similar object

👉 Provided:

• The statement is made ante litem motam (before any dispute arose)

2. Scope of the Provision

• Applies to:
  • Family relationships such as:
    • Parentage
    • Marriage
    • Adoption
    • Lineage
• Covers:
  • Statements found in:
    • Wills
    • Family records
    • Tombstones
    • Family portraits

👉 These are considered reliable as they are:

• Made in natural family settings
• Free from litigation bias

3. Essential Conditions (Note Form)For admissibility under Section 26(f):

• ✔ Maker of statement must be:
  • Dead or cannot be found
• ✔ Statement must relate to:
  • Family relationship
• ✔ Statement must be:
  • Contained in:
    • Will, deed, pedigree, tombstone, etc.
• ✔ Must be made:
  • Ante litem motam (before dispute arose)

4. Meaning of Ante Litem Motam

• Means:
  👉 Statement made before any litigation or dispute

✔ Ensures:

• Statement is:
  • Unbiased and trustworthy

5. Evidentiary Value

• ✔ Statements are:
  • Relevant evidence

👉 Because:

• They reflect:
  • Natural family declarations
• Not made with:
  • Motive to mislead

6. Difference Between Section 26(e) and Section 26(f) (Note Form)(i) Persons Concerned

• Section 26(e):
  • Applies to:
    • Living or deceased persons
• Section 26(f):
  • Applies only when:
    • Person is dead or cannot be found

(ii) Source of Knowledge

• Section 26(e):
  • Requires:
    • Person with special means of knowledge
• Section 26(f):
  • No such requirement explicitly

(iii) Form of Statement

• Section 26(e):
  • May be:
    • Oral or written
• Section 26(f):
  • Must be:
    • In documents or physical objects
      (e.g., will, tombstone, pedigree)

(iv) Nature of Evidence

• Section 26(e):
  • Statement of a person
• Section 26(f):
  • Statement embodied in:
    • Things or documents

7. Illustration Explained

• If a will states:
  • “A is the son of B”

👉 And maker is dead
✔ Statement is:

• Relevant to prove relationship

8. Key Legal Principle👉 Statements relating to family relationships contained in wills, deeds, or family records made before dispute are admissible as relevant evidence.

9. Purpose of Section 26(f)

• Recognizes:
  • Difficulty in proving:
    • Family lineage
• Allows:
  • Use of:
    • Traditional and documentary family evidence

10. Key Takeaways

• Section 26(f) deals with:
  • Family relationship declarations in documents
• Conditions:
  • Dead/unavailable maker
  • Ante litem motam
• Evidence must be:
  • In recognized forms (will, pedigree, etc.)

One-Line Summary👉 Statements about family relationships contained in wills, deeds, or similar records made before dispute by deceased persons are relevant evidence.

​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Document Relating to Transaction Stated under Section 11(a) (Section 26(g))
​
1. Basic Principle of Section 26(g)Under Section 26(g) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, the law provides that:
Statements contained in documents are relevant when they relate to a transaction as described under Section 11(a), particularly where such transaction:

• Creates
• Modifies
• Recognizes
• Asserts
• Denies
  a right or custom

2. Scope of the Provision

• Applies to both:
  • Private rights, and
  • Public rights or customs
• Covers:
  • Documents such as:
    • Deeds
    • Wills
    • Agreements
    • Other legal instruments

👉 These documents must relate to:

• A transaction affecting rights or customs

3. Essential Conditions (Note Form)For admissibility under this section:

• ✔ Statement must be:
  • Contained in a document
• ✔ Document must relate to:
  • A transaction within Section 11(a), i.e.:
    • Creation of right
    • Modification of right
    • Recognition of right
    • Assertion or denial of right

4. Meaning of “Transaction”

• A “transaction” includes:
  • Any act or dealing affecting:
    • Legal rights
    • Customs

👉 Example:

• Sale of property
• Grant of easement
• Recognition of customary rights

5. Relevancy of Such Statements

• Statements in documents are relevant when:
  • They are part of a transaction affecting rights

👉 Even if:

• The document itself is not directly in issue

6. Important Limitation

• Recitals in documents not between the parties (not inter partes):

❌ Generally inadmissible under:

• Section 9
• Section 11(a)
• Section 26(c)
• Section 26(g)

👉 Reason:

• They may not bind or affect the parties involved

7. Exception (Important Insight)

• Such recitals may be admitted only:
  • Under specific conditions
  • Or when supported by:
    • Independent evidence
    • Other admissible provisions

8. Key Legal Principle👉 Statements in documents are relevant if they form part of transactions affecting legal rights or customs, but their admissibility depends on their connection to the parties and the transaction.

9. Purpose of Section 26(g)

• To allow:
  • Documentary evidence of:
    • Historical or legal transactions
• Helps in:
  • Proving existence and nature of:
    • Rights
    • Customs

10. Key Takeaways

• Section 26(g) deals with:
  • Statements in documents relating to transactions
• Conditions:
  • Must relate to rights/customs
• Limitation:
  • Not inter partes documents → generally inadmissible

One-Line Summary👉 Statements in documents relating to transactions affecting rights or customs are relevant, provided they meet the requirements of Section 11(a).

​KembaraXtra – Indian Evidence Law – Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam – Statement Made by Several Persons Expressing Feelings (Section 26(h))
​
1. Basic Principle of Section 26(h)Under Section 26(h) of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, the law provides that:
Statements expressing the feelings, impressions, or emotions of a group of persons are relevant when they relate to a matter in issue.
👉 Unlike individual statements, this clause deals with:

• Collective expressions (e.g., crowd reactions)

2. Nature of Such Statements

• These are:
  • Spontaneous expressions
  • Made by:
    • A group or crowd

👉 Reflect:

• Common feeling or impression at that moment

3. Scope of the Provision

• Applies when:
  • A group of persons:
    • Gather together
    • Express a common sentiment
• Such statements may be:
  • Repeated in court by witnesses

👉 Even though:

• Individual speakers are not identified

4. Key Requirements (Note Form)For admissibility:

• ✔ Statement must be:
  • Made by several persons (group/crowd)
• ✔ Must express:
  • Common feeling or impression
• ✔ Must relate to:
  • A fact in issue or relevant fact
• ✔ Must be:
  • Spontaneous and contemporaneous

5. Evidentiary Value

• ✔ Statements are:
  • Relevant evidence

👉 Because:

• They show:
  • State of mind of a group at a particular time

6. Illustration Explained

• A crowd gathers and shouts:
  • Indicating fear, anger, or recognition

👉 Witness may testify:

• What the crowd collectively expressed

✔ This is admissible:

• As it reflects shared perception or reaction

7. Key Legal Principle👉 Collective expressions of a group, reflecting a common state of mind at a particular moment, are admissible as relevant evidence.

8. Purpose of Section 26(h)

• Recognizes:
  • Practical difficulty in identifying:
    • Individual speakers in a crowd
• Allows:
  • Admission of:
    • Collective human reactions

9. Key Takeaways

• Section 26(h) deals with:
  • Group expressions of feelings
• Admissible when:
  • Spontaneous and related to issue
• Useful in:
  • Crowd situations
  • Public incidents

One-Line Summary👉 Statements expressing the collective feelings or impressions of a group are relevant when they relate to a fact in issue.