1.

Fact , Facts in Issues’s , Relevant Fact’

Fact:-

Definition:- According to Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, "fact"

means and includes—

1 When certain things are placed in a certain way/pattern, it is a fact.

2 When a person sees or hears something, it is a fact.
3 The words spoken by a person, is a fact.

Detailed Explanation:

Happening or Perceptibility:

The Act encompasses events, occurrences, or situations that have taken place
and are perceivable by human senses. This includes actions, incidents, or
circumstances that have transpired.

The scope of "fact" extends beyond territorial boundaries, meaning events or

situations occurring within or outside India are covered under this definition.

Mental Condition:

The mental state or condition of any individual is considered a "fact" under the
Act. This includes emotions, beliefs, intentions, perceptions, and any other
mental states that are relevant to the case.

Mental conditions are often crucial in determining a person's culpability,

intentions, credibility, or capacity to understand or perform certain actions.

Documentary Evidence:

The Act also includes documents within the definition of "fact." This
encompasses any material written, printed, or produced, which is presented
for examination or consideration in a legal proceeding.
 Documents play a significant role in legal proceedings as they serve as tangible
evidence of events, transactions, agreements, or other relevant matters.

‘Fact’ may be defined as: Any thing, state of things, relation of things, that
can be sensed (external fact).
Any mental condition of which any person is conscious (internal fact).
For instance–

 The opinion of a person.

 The intentions of a person.
 A person acting in good faith/fraudulently.
 The deliberate choice of a person’s words.
 Feeling a certain sensation at a certain time.
 A person’s reputation.

Physical and psychological facts

Physical facts are those that can be discovered through the use of a person’s
senses. For instance, observing the arrangement of certain objects, hearing the
distinct sound of a horn, etc. However, the law of evidence is not restricted to
physical facts “only”. Beyond, physical facts lie psychological facts which are
based on the mental condition of a person. For instance, when a person
commits fraud, his intention to deceive the other party is also a fact.

Positive and negative facts

When the existence of a situation or state of things can be confirmed, it is a
positive fact. For instance, in a property dispute case, the deceased left a will to
bequeath his property. The existence of the will is a positive fact. On the other
hand, the non-existence of a situation or state of things is a negative fact. For
instance, the lack of a weapon at the scene of a murder.

Case laws:- State of Punjab vs. Jagir Singh & Anr. (2003):

The Punjab and Haryana High Court emphasized the broad interpretation of the
term "fact" under the Indian Evidence Act, affirming that it includes not only
physical events but also mental conditions and states. The court held that
circumstantial evidence, when properly analyzed and corroborated, can
establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Ramesh Chandra Agrawal vs. Regency Hospital Ltd. & Anr. (2010)

The Supreme Court held that in medical negligence cases, the standard of care is a "fact" to be
established by expert evidence. The court reiterated the definition of "fact" under the Indian
Evidence Act, emphasizing its broad scope to include not only events but also conditions and
states, such as the standard of care in medical practice.

Fact in Issue
Facts in issue are those facts that are sought to be proved and are also called
“principal facts” or factum probandum. When the rights and liabilities of the
parties are dependent on a fact that is in dispute or controversy, that fact is in
issue.

For example, ‘X’ is accused of defaming ‘Y’ through libel. The possible facts may
be in issue: that ‘X’ caused damage to ‘Y’s reputation; ‘Y’s business suffered
losses due to ‘X’s defamation; ‘X’ wrote and published defamatory statements
about ‘Y’ out of malice, etc.

Facts in issue determine the arguments of both the plaintiffs and defendants.
The parties must prove that the facts in issue lean toward their pleadings in
order to sway the court’s decision in their favour. The substantive law applicable
to the offence determines what constitutes the facts in issue. In criminal cases,
facts in issue depend on the contents of the charge-sheet, whereas, in civil
cases the framing of issues takes place.

Facts in issue form the foundation upon which the parties argue their case, and
when these facts are proved to the satisfaction of the court, a decision can be
made.

Illustrations

A is accused of the murder of B. At his trial the following facts may be in issue

 That A caused B’s death

 That A intended to cause B’s death
 That A had received grave and sudden provocation from B
  That A, at the time of doing the act which caused B’s death, was, by reason of unsoundness
of mind, incapable of knowing its nature.

1. Hanumant Govind Nargundkar vs. Madhav Vishwanath Gadgil (1978):

the Bombay High Court examined the definition and scope of "fact in issue" in the context of a
civil suit related to the partition of joint family property.

2 . State of U.P. vs. Naresh and Ors. (1974)

The court held that in a murder trial, the "fact in issue" is whether the accused caused the death
of the victim and whether such act amounts to murder or any other lesser offense

Relevant Fact
Relevant facts are those which are needed to prove or disprove a fact in issue.
Relevant facts are also called evidentiary facts (factum probans). These facts
are not in issue – they are not the main issue of controversy or dispute between
the parties. Rather, relevant or evidentiary facts dig deeper into the context or
circumstances of the facts in issue, and help to draw inferences about them.

Admissions and confessions, statements by those who are not witnesses,

precedents from case laws, statements made under special circumstances, facts
which form a chain of logic with facts in issue, third party opinions, and
evidence as to the character of a person – all these fall under the category of
relevant facts.

Relevant facts indicate a relationship between facts, which according to a sound

chain of logic and common sense, either prove or disprove the existence of each
other. Relevant facts act as supplementary material to sway the opinion of the
court in favour of the party making the argument with respect to the facts in
issue.

For example, ‘A’ is accused of committing theft. A relevant fact would be that ‘A’
has had a history of pickpocketing and shoplifting, and has been prosecuted
before. The fact in issue would be – whether A has committed theft.

Detailed Explanation:
1. Connection to the Issue:
  A relevant fact is one that is logically connected to the central issue or fact in
issue in the case. It has a bearing on the determination of the disputed matter
and assists in arriving at a just and fair decision.
2. Probative Value:
 Relevant facts are those that have probative value, meaning they tend to make
the existence of a fact in issue more or less probable. They contribute to the
establishment of the truth or falsity of the matter under consideration.
3. Materiality:
 The relevance of a fact depends on its materiality to the case. Facts that are
immaterial or tangential to the issues in dispute are not considered relevant
under the Indian Evidence Act.
4. Admissibility Criteria:
 Relevant facts are admissible as evidence in court proceedings, subject to the
rules of admissibility laid down in the Evidence Act and other applicable laws.
2. Evidence- Oral , Documentary , proved ,
disproved and nor proved.

Evidence
The origin of the term ‘evidence’ can be traced to the Latin words “evident” or
“evidere” – meaning to discover, determine or arrive at the truth. Evidence also
implies – to make clear, certain, notorious. Evidence plays a key role in the
judicial process by supporting or building an argument before the court, with
respect to proving or disproving a matter of fact or controversy, between the
parties.

Oral evidence
Covered in detail under Section 59 and 60 of the Act, oral evidence can be
defined as the statements made by witnesses which are allowed or needed by
the court. These statements by witnesses help determine the matter in issue or
controversy between the parties. When a witness orally makes a statement it is
regarded as oral evidence. Witness testimony has also been called ‘living proof.’
However, in the cases where a witness is unable to speak, then communication
through signs or writing is also admissible as oral evidence.

Usually, all evidence that is not written in documents is oral evidence and is
sufficient to prove a fact or title. However, according to Section 60, in the
presence of both documentary evidence and oral evidence, the former takes
precedence.

Oral evidence must be direct i.e., the witness making the statement must have
seen or heard, or experienced the event first-hand.

Hearsay evidence
Whenever information passes through indirect channels, such as rumours or
gossip, it can be termed as ‘hearsay.’ Hearsay evidence is that information
which has not been obtained through direct means, and has not been
experienced by the witness firsthand. Hearsay evidence is not admissible in
court and does not hold evidentiary value.

However, hearsay evidence is admissible in the case of the following

exceptions:

 A statement made by someone other than a witness becomes

admissible when it is part of the transaction in question according to
the principle of res gestae in Section 6. For example, an hour before a
murder took place, ‘A’ heard ‘B’ making death threats to the victim
inside the victim’s house. B’s death threats before the murder were
part of the transaction in question as the murder took place an hour
later.
 The testimony of a witness to whom a confession or admission was
made outside the court.
 Dying declaration made under Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence
Act, 1872.
 Entries in books of account in the course of business under Section 34;
entries in public registers under Section 35.
 Under Section 60, in the absence or death of experts, their thoughts
and words expressed in their treatises and books can be counted as
evidence.
 When a slanderous statement is made in the presence of a witness, the
witness can testify as to the fact that the statement was made.

Documentary evidence
Documentary evidence is covered by Section 61-90 of the Act. All documents
submitted to the court for scrutiny fall under the umbrella of documentary
evidence. Documentary evidence holds precedence as compared to oral
evidence, in terms of both credibility and permanence. Documentary evidence is
also called ‘dead proof.’ Due to the improvement in technology and the coming
up of legislation such as the IT Act, 2000, electronic evidence has also been
included within the purview of documentary evidence.

Documentary evidence can be of two types: 1) primary evidence, and 2)

secondary evidence.
Primary evidence
Primary evidence includes the original document; a document executed in
separate parts; a document that has been manufactured or produced by one
uniform, mass process (for example, photographs, lithographs, etc).

Secondary evidence
Secondary evidence includes certified copies of the original document. Also,
when original documents are used to make a large number of copies through a
mechanical process, for example, by printing, photocopying, etc.

Classification of evidence
Evidence can be classified into various types and is not restricted to a narrow,
rigid definition.

Direct and circumstantial evidence

Direct evidence directly addresses the fact in issue or the matter of controversy
between parties. It includes both the statement of witnesses and documentary
evidence. For example, ‘A’ witnessed ‘B’ killing ‘C’ with a knife. ‘A’s witness
testimony of the murder of ‘C’ by ‘B’, is direct evidence. Direct evidence takes
precedence over circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence depends on the
credibility of the witness testimony and the documents submitted.

Whereas, circumstantial evidence is based upon relevant facts that prove or

disprove the fact in issue. Circumstantial evidence must prove the guilt of the
accused beyond doubt if it is to be admissible in court. Circumstantial evidence
takes the indirect route to prove or disprove the fact in issue, however, it must
not be confused with secondary evidence.

In cases like Umedbhai v. the State of Gujarat (1977) and Gade Lakshmi
Mangraju v. the State of Andhra Pradesh (2001), when a chain of circumstantial
evidence forms a cumulative effect through a sound logic chain, and the
circumstances are conclusive in nature, and prove the guilt of the accused
beyond doubt, then circumstantial evidence is very much admissible in court.
Real and personal evidence
Real evidence consists of the assumptions or conclusions the court draws from
the information available to it. For example, DNA found at the crime scene; the
nervous behaviour of the accused before the judge; fingerprints found on the
murder weapon, etc. Personal evidence is obtained through human agency.

Original and unoriginal evidence

Original evidence is firsthand evidence, which a witness has personally
experienced through his own senses. Whereas, unoriginal evidence is secondary
or hearsay and has been learned indirectly through a third party.

Substantive and non-substantive evidence

Substantive evidence is that evidence which does not need to be corroborated
and serves to prove or disprove a fact in issue. Substantive evidence can be
both circumstantial or direct. Non-substantive evidence does not hold enough
weight by itself and is not sufficient to prove or disprove a fact.

Positive and negative evidence

Positive evidence proves that an event has taken place or that a certain fact
exists. Whereas, negative evidence proves that a fact does not exist.

Prosecution evidence and defence evidence

Evidence used by the prosecution to prove the guilt of the defendant or accused
is called prosecution evidence. On the other hand, the evidence used by the
defendant to prove his innocence is called defence evidence.

Proved
When the court believes beyond a reasonable doubt in the existence of a certain
fact or believes that a reasonable man would be likely to act in a certain manner
on the basis of his belief that said fact exists, then the fact is said to be
“proved.”
Disproved
When the court believes beyond reasonable doubt that a fact does not exist,
and that a reasonable man would upon knowing the details of the case, act on
the belief that the fact does not exist, the fact is said to be “disproved.”

Not proved
A fact is said to be “not proved” when it is neither proved nor disproved, and a
reasonable man would not believe in the existence or the non-existence of the
fact.

Conclusion
The law of evidence is a key tool to aid the judiciary in weaving and sorting
through the vast information each case presents. Only evidence which falls
under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is admissible and has evidentiary value.
This prevents the court from wasting its time and helps the court in quickly
gaining access to the relevant and correct evidence needed to determine the
outcome of a case. Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, is an
interpretation and definitions clause that describes key terms and concepts used
in the Act, and in deciphering evidence law.

Case laws :
R. M. Malkani vs. State of Maharashtra (1973)

1) Background:

In this case, the Supreme Court of India examined the definition and scope of "evidence" under
the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, in the context of a criminal trial.

2) Conclusion:

The court held that evidence includes all the documents produced for the inspection of the
court, such as tangible objects, writings, maps, photographs, and audio-visual recordings, which
are intended to establish or disprove any fact in issue or relevant fact.

The court emphasized that evidence may be either oral or documentary and may consist of
primary or secondary evidence. Primary evidence refers to the original document itself, while
secondary evidence refers to copies or duplicates of the original document.
State of Maharashtra vs. Damu (2000)

1.Background:

In this case, the Supreme Court of India considered the admissibility of electronic evidence,
particularly intercepted telephone conversations, in a criminal trial.

2.Conclusion:

The court held that intercepted telephone conversations, if properly authenticated and
produced in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Telegraph Act and the Indian Evidence
Act, constitute admissible evidence. Such evidence falls within the definition of "evidence"
under the Indian Evidence Act and can be used to establish the guilt or innocence of the
accused.

The court emphasized the importance of following the prescribed procedures for the
interception, recording, and production of electronic evidence to ensure its admissibility in
court.