Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 : Some Important Features
S.2 (b) says "conclusive proof" means when one fact is declared by said Adhiniyam to
be conclusive proof of another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the
other as proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving
it.
Sec. 20 says oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant, unless and
until the party proposing to prove them shows that he is entitled to give secondary evidence
of the contents of such document under the rules hereinafter contained, or unless the
genuineness of a document produced is in question.
A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between
the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of S.27 of BSA, 2023.
Sec. 34 of BSA, 2023 says that the existence of any judgment, order or decree which by law prevents any Court
from taking cognizance of a suit or holding a trial, is a relevant fact when the question is
whether such Court ought to take cognizance of such suit or to hold such trial.
S.113 says when the question is whether any person is owner of anything of which he is
shown to be in possession, the burden of proving that he is not the owner is on the person
who affirms that he is not the owner.
S.108 says when a person is accused of any offence, the burden of proving the existence of
circumstances bringing the case within any of the General Exceptions in the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or within any special exception or proviso contained in any other part
of the said Sanhita, or in any law defining the offence, is upon him, and the Court shall
presume the absence of such circumstances.
S.102 says persons who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest,
may give evidence of any facts tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the
terms of the document.
S.93 says where any electronic record, purporting or proved to be 5 years old, is produced
from any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may
presume that the electronic signature which purports to be the electronic signature of any
particular person was so affixed by him or any person authorised by him in this behalf.
Sec. 53 says no fact needs to be proved in any proceeding which the parties thereto or their
agents agree to admit at the hearing, or which, before the hearing, they agree to admit by
any writing under their hands, or which by any rule of pleading in force at the time they are
deemed to have admitted by their pleadings:
Sec. 46 says in civil cases the fact that the character of any person concerned is such as to
render probable or improbable any conduct imputed to him, is irrelevant, except in so far as
such character appears from facts otherwise relevant.
Sec. 45 says whenever the opinion of any living person is relevant, the grounds on which
such opinion is based are also relevant.
Written by
Vishal
Delhi
Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters/blogs without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made by the violator. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction. Reproduction of judgment or publication of judgment unless expressly prohibited by Court according is not an infringement of copyright according to S. 52 (1)(q)(iv) of Copyright Act, 1957. This is not to be considered as any professional legal advice and does not constitute client-attorney relationship.