Introduction and Relevancy of Facts (Res Gestae, Motive, Preparation) notes — Unit 1

The Indian Evidence Act (IEA), drafted by Sir James Fitzjames Stephen in 1872, is considered one of the most brilliant and perfectly drafted pieces of legislation in Indian history. It dictates exactly what can be proved in a court of law and how it can be proved.

⇒Nature of the Act

The Evidence Act is an Adjective Law (Procedural Law). It does not define crimes (like IPC) or create rights (like Contract Act). It provides the machinery to prove those crimes and rights. It applies to ALL judicial proceedings in or before any Court, including court-martials.

⇒Exceptions (Where it does NOT apply)

• Affidavits presented to any Court or Officer.
• Arbitration proceedings (Arbitrators are not bound by strict rules of evidence; they follow principles of natural justice).
• Departmental or Disciplinary inquiries.

The entire Evidence Act revolves around proving 'Facts'. But what is a fact?

⇒Definition of 'Fact'

Fact means and includes:

• (1) Physical Facts: Anything, state of things, or relation of things, capable of being perceived by the senses. (e.g., That there are certain objects arranged in a certain order; That a man heard or saw something).
• (2) Psychological/Mental Facts: Any mental condition of which any person is conscious. (e.g., That a man holds a certain opinion, has a certain intention, acts in good faith, or fraudulently).

Section 5 lays down the golden rule of evidence: 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.

⇒Fact in Issue (Factum Probandum)

These are the core matters in dispute. They are the facts which, if proved, establish the right or liability of the parties. They are the ultimate facts that need to be proved. (e.g., In a murder trial, the Fact in Issue is: Did A kill B?)

⇒Relevant Fact (Factum Probans)

These are evidential facts. They are not the main issue themselves, but they are so closely connected to the Fact in Issue that they help prove or disprove it. (e.g., In the murder trial, the fact that A bought a gun two days before the murder is a Relevant Fact. It doesn't prove murder directly, but it's highly relevant to proving preparation).

How does a judge decide if a fact actually happened?

• Proved: A fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters before it, the Court either believes it to exist, or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists.
• Disproved: A fact is disproved when the Court believes that it does not exist, or considers its non-existence so probable that a prudent man would act on the supposition that it does not exist.
• Not Proved: A fact is said to be not proved when it is neither proved nor disproved. (This is a state of doubt. The evidence is simply insufficient either way).

(Note the pragmatic approach: The law does not require absolute, mathematical certainty. It requires the standard of a 'prudent man').

Normally, hearsay evidence (what someone else told the witness) is NOT admissible. Res Gestae is a major exception.

⇒The Principle of Res Gestae

Section 6 states: "Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places."

Res Gestae translates to "things done" or the facts forming the same transaction.

⇒Spontaneous Statements

If a person is stabbed on the street and screams, "Help, John is killing me!" and a bystander hears this, the bystander can testify in court about what he heard. Even though it is hearsay, the scream was spontaneous and contemporaneous with the stabbing, making it a part of the 'same transaction' (Res Gestae).

Courts apply Section 6 very strictly to prevent fabricated evidence.

• Contemporaneity: The statement or act must be contemporaneous (occurring at the same time) with the main fact, or so closely connected to it that it forms one continuous chain.
• No time for fabrication: The statement must be a spontaneous reaction to the event. If there is a gap of an hour, the person has time to think and lie. Then it is NOT Res Gestae.
• Illustrations: A is accused of the murder of B by beating him. Whatever was said or done by A or B or the by-standers at the beating, or so shortly before or after it as to form part of the transaction, is a relevant fact.

Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of relevant facts, or which constitute the state of things under which they happened, or which afforded an opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant.

• Cause: Why did the event happen? (e.g., A loan given by the victim to the accused which the accused didn't want to repay).
• Effect: What happened immediately after? (e.g., Footprints found near the murdered body, or bloodstains on the floor).
• Opportunity: (e.g., The fact that the victim was entirely alone in the house when the murder occurred).

Section 8 is one of the most widely used sections in criminal trials. It makes three crucial behavioral aspects relevant.

⇒1. Motive

Motive is the emotion or desire which drives a person to act. While a crime can be proved without proving motive (if eyewitnesses exist), proving motive heavily strengthens the prosecution's case, especially in circumstantial evidence cases. (e.g., A owed B a large sum of money and B was pressuring him. This is relevant as a motive for A to kill B).

⇒2. Preparation

Preparation consists of arranging the means or measures necessary for the commission of the offence. (e.g., A is tried for the murder of B by poison. The fact that A procured poison similar to that which was administered to B, just days before the murder, is relevant).

⇒3. Conduct (Previous or Subsequent)

The conduct of any party (accused or victim) is relevant, if such conduct influences or is influenced by any fact in issue or relevant fact.

• Subsequent Conduct of Accused: Absconding immediately after the crime, destroying evidence, washing blood-stained clothes, attempting to bribe police. These show a 'guilty mind'.

⇒Statements accompanying Conduct

Under Section 8, a mere statement is NOT relevant as conduct, unless those statements accompany and explain acts. (e.g., The victim running away (conduct) while shouting "He is going to shoot me!" (statement). The statement explains the conduct and becomes relevant).

Facts necessary to explain or introduce a fact in issue or relevant fact are relevant. This section deals with "setting the scene".

⇒Key aspects of Section 9:

• Test Identification Parade (TIP): The most important use of Sec 9. When a witness identifies an accused (whom they didn't know previously) in a police lineup, that identification is relevant under Section 9 to establish the identity of the person.
• Time and Place: Facts fixing the time and place at which any fact in issue happened.
• Relation of parties: Facts showing the relation of parties by whom any such fact was transacted (e.g., showing they were bitter rivals).

Conspiracies are hatched in secrecy. Section 10 provides a special rule of evidence to tackle them (The Rule of Agency in Conspiracy).

Where there is reasonable ground to believe that two or more persons have conspired together to commit an offence, anything said, done or written by any one of such persons in reference to their common intention, after the time when such intention was first entertained by any one of them, is a relevant fact as against each of the persons believed to be so conspiring.

Facts not otherwise relevant become relevant if they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact.

⇒What is Alibi?

Alibi is a Latin word meaning "elsewhere". It is the most common defense used by an accused.

If the prosecution claims A murdered B in Delhi at 9 PM on Monday, the fact that A was at a conference in Mumbai at exactly 9 PM on Monday is ordinarily irrelevant. BUT under Section 11, it becomes highly relevant because A's presence in Mumbai is highly inconsistent with his presence in Delhi at the same time.

• Burden of Proof: The burden of proving the plea of alibi rests strictly on the accused.
• Strict Standard: The alibi must be absolutely airtight. The physical distance must be such that it was impossible for the accused to be at the crime scene.

⇒Summary of Master Concepts

• Fact (Sec 3): Physical (seen/heard) and Psychological (intentions).
• Fact in Issue vs Relevant Fact: The main dispute vs the supporting evidence.
• Res Gestae (Sec 6): Spontaneous acts/statements forming the same transaction. Exception to hearsay.
• Motive, Preparation, Conduct (Sec 8): Crucial behavioral evidence in criminal trials.
• Conspiracy (Sec 10): Acts of one conspirator act as evidence against all.
• Alibi (Sec 11): Proving presence "elsewhere" to show inconsistency with the crime.

⇒University Exam Tips for this Unit (Premium Advice)

• Res Gestae: You must emphasize 'spontaneity' and 'contemporaneity'. The moment the witness has time to reflect and fabricate a story, it ceases to be Res Gestae. Cite a hypothetical example (e.g., victim shouting while being chased).
• Section 8 (Conduct vs Statement): A favorite tricky question. Explain clearly that a complaint to the police is relevant as 'conduct', but a mere statement to friends a day later is not.
• Alibi: Clarify that setting up an alibi does not shift the initial burden from the prosecution. Prosecution must first prove the crime; only then the defense proves the alibi.