TRIAL ADVOCACY

PROJECT ON:

RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER
IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF:

MS. PRAGNYA PARIMITA RAY
FACULTY OF TRIAL ADVOCACY
NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, ODISHA

SUBMITTED BY: -

PALLAVI CHOUDHARY
{2015/B.B.A.LLB/036}
SHASWAT DROLIA
{2015/B.BA.LLB/048}
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Our sincere gratitude and profound regards to Ms. Pragnya Parimita Ray, for her exemplary
guidance and constant encouragement throughout the course of this project. The help,
blessing and guidance given by her from time to time helped us to arrive at a better
understanding of the project topic.
We feel pleased to have been asked to produce our project on the topic, ‘Relevancy of
Character in the Law of Evidence’.
With this project, we aim to provide you with the most comprehensive information covering
the broad fields within the ambit of this topic.

~1~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................................... 3

I. STATUTE ......................................................................................................................... 3
II. CASES ............................................................................................................................. 3
III. BOOKS AND ARTICLES .................................................................................................... 3
IV. MISCELLANEOUS ............................................................................................................ 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................... 4

I. SCOPE OF PAPER .............................................................................................................. 4

II. RESEARCH QUESTIONS .................................................................................................... 4
III. CHAPTERISATION ............................................................................................................ 4

INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 5
WHAT IS CHARACTER? ..................................................................................................... 5
CHARACTER EVIDENCE IN CIVIL LAW ....................................................................... 6
CHARACTER EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL LAW.............................................................. 7

I. SECTION 53: RELEVANCY OF GOOD CHARACTER ........................................................... 8

II. SECTION 54: BAD CHARACTER WHEN RELEVANT ........................................................... 8
A. When evidence of good character is given ................................................................ 9
B. When Character of the Accused is itself an issue ...................................................... 9
C. Previous Conviction ................................................................................................. 10

CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................... 11

~2~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

I. STATUTE

Indian Evidence Act 1872 6

II. CASES

Amrita Lal Hazra v. Emperor, [1915] 42 Cal 957 8

Ashok Dubey v. State of Madhya Pradesh, [1980] MPLJ 300 10
Attwood Re, [1960] 102 CLR 353 9
Englishman v. Lajpatray, ILR 37 Cal 760 6
Habeeb Mohammad v. The State of Hyderabad, [1954] AIR SC 51 8
Hollington v. F. Hewthorn and Co. Ltd., [1943] AllER 235 11
Jagganath Prasad v. Ram Chandran, [1952] AIR All 408 7
Plato Films Ltd. v. Spide, [1961] AC 1090 6
Sardar Sardul Singh Caveeshar v. State of Maharashtra, [1964] 2 SCR 378 8

III. BOOKS AND ARTICLES

David Torrance, Evidence of Character in Civil and Criminal Proceedings, 12 YLJ 352
6
(2003)
Ratanlal & Dhirajlal, The Law of Evidence (2011) 7
Vepa P. Sarthi, Law of Evidence (2017) 7

IV. MISCELLANEOUS

Law Dictionary: What is CHARACTER? definition of CHARACTER (Black's Law

5
Dictionary).
'The Most Controversial Areas in the Law of
Evidence'<http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/criminal-law/the-most-
11
controversial-areas-in-the-law-of-evidence-criminal-law-essay.php> last accessed 20th
August 2018.

~3~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

I.SCOPE OF PAPER

This research is an analytical and descriptive one, which is based on secondary sources of
information. The doctrinaire method of research has been applied to this project, involving a
detailed content analysis and consultation of existing literature, which includes books
procured from the NLUO library, along with various e- resources.
The researcher has followed a uniform pattern and method of citation and footnoting
throughout this project.

II. RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The authors have worked on the project while keeping in mind the following objectives:

1) Relevancy of character in both civil and criminal jurisprudence.

2) Analysis of provisions dealing with character evidence in civil and criminal law.

III. CHAPTERISATION

The project has been categorized into following chapters:

1) Introduction
2) What is Character?
3) Character Evidence in Civil Law
4) Character Evidence in Criminal Law
a. When Evidence of Good Character is given
b. When Character of the Accused is itself an issue
c. Previous Conviction
5) Conclusion

~4~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

INTRODUCTION

"Character is like a tree and reputation like a shadow. The shadow is what we think of it; the
tree is the real thing."
~ Abraham Lincoln
The Black's Law dictionary defines character as, "The aggregate of the moral qualities which
belong to and distinguish an individual person; the general result of the-one’s distinguishing
attributes. That moral predisposition or habit, or aggregate of ethical qualities, which is
believed to attach to a person, on the strength of the common opinion and report concerning
him.."1
Character though a moral construct is being utilised in the present day legal setup. It is
understood that the concepts of 'law', 'state' had been developed to have principles that are
not influenced by the social, moral, political, economical factors when in its application. Yet
the legal system resorts to the means of the concept of 'character ' to fulfil its ends. So the
usage of character as evidence is conditional in nature and the character of man is admissible
in the court of law under defined circumstances.
The condition under which character of the accused is made admissible in law of evidence is
governed by sections 52 to 55 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872. These sections majorly cover
the circumstances and factors under which character of any person is pertinent in civil suits
and criminal trials. Section 52 gives a general principle for the usage of character for
imputing conduct of any person as being irrelevant in civil cases except where the character
is the subject matter. Section 53 provides that previous good character of the accused is
relevant in criminal proceedings. Section 54 imparts that evidence of bad character is not
admissible except in reply to evidence being adduced by the other person in regard to their
good character. Section 55 pertains to admissibility of character evidence in civil suits when
the character of the person in the concerned matter is such that it would affect the amount of
damages he or she is entitled to receive.

WHAT IS CHARACTER?

Lord Denning had observed, "A man's character is what he is in fact whereas his reputation

1
Law Dictionary: What is CHARACTER? definition of CHARACTER (Black's Law Dictionary).

~5~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

is what other people think he is".2

Character as read in the explanation of section 55 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 is seen to
be composed of both reputation and disposition.3 Reputation is the community opinion as to
what a person is or their general opinion as to his or her conduct.4 Disposition on the other
hand is the nature of a man that he has been dependant on his socialisation as well as that
nature was contributed to through his genes.5 It is the combination of the peculiar qualities
impressed by nature or by habit of the person, which distinguishes one from the other.
Character being a socio-moral construct it is sought to be kept away from the institution of
law as far as possible. Owing to which two scenarios were chalked out so as to have the
character of any person adduced as evidence in a court of law, they being: first scenario is
when the character of the person is the pertinent issue in the given case. For example when a
person has been charged with the offence of libel, evidence would be admitted in regard to
his character to gauge and understand the propensity of that person to do so in the past. The
second scenario is when there is a need for questioning the integrity and credibility of the
witness produced. For example the propensity to lie would be of significance to the decision
of making statements of witness by themselves. Character evidence is evidence that pertains
to the character of either the parties to the suit or the witnesses.
In order to admit evidence vis-a-vis character of any person, the mode of ascertaining
information about the person to be a true and unbiased description of one's character is
provided in the explanation of section 55of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 where it states that
evidence must be admitted when in regard to character of any person only when it is being
derived from the general reputation and disposition and not from the particular acts by which
reputation and disposition could have been deduced.6

CHARACTER EVIDENCE IN CIVIL LAW

The circumstances under which character evidence is associated with civil law is in the
manner of declaring its irrelevance in a civil proceedings except in cases where it is the direct
subject matter of the suit7 and when it has the capacity to influence the amount of damages

2
Plato Films Ltd. v. Spide, [1961] AC 1090.
3
Englishman v. Lajpatray, ILR 37 Cal 760.
4
David Torrance, Evidence of Character in Civil and Criminal Proceedings, 12 YLJ 352 (2003).
5
Id.
6
§ 55, Indian Evidence Act 1872.
7
§ 52, Indian Evidence Act 1872.

~6~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

that a particular person is entitled to.8

The principle of section 52 of the Indian Evidence Act 1872 is based on the premise that a
very bad man may have a just cause which is why it has been worded to decry character in
civil suits.9 The general rule is that the evidence as to the character of a person is irrelevant
in civil case.10 The scope and ambit of this section deals with the character of the parties to
the suit and does not take into account the character evidence as presented vis-a-vis witnesses
produced in a court of law.11 This section is based on the principle that the evidence admitted
in a court of law should be alike, directed and confined to the matters which are in dispute, or
which form the subject matter of the investigation.12
The gist of section 55 of the Act is that evidence regarding character should be limited to
general reputation and general disposition of the person. Along with section 12 of the Indian
Evidence Act 1872 which deals with admissibility of facts that have the capacity to impact
the quantum of damages and those facts are seen to be relevant, it is understood that any civil
case that poses the issue regarding the quantum of damages to be awarded the character of the
person in question would be relevant.

CHARACTER EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL LAW

In India, the law of character evidence in criminal law is governed by two sections of the
Indian Evidence Act, namely, section 53 and section 54. Section 53 deals with the relevancy
of good character in a criminal trial.13 According to that section, the fact that the person who
is accused of a crime is of good character is relevant. On the other hand, section 54 deals with
the extent of relevancy of bad character of the accused.14 According to that section, the fact
that the person who is accused of a crime has bad character is not relevant, unless evidence
that s/he has a good character is given. In such cases, the evidence of bad character would
become relevant. This section however, does not apply in cases in which the bad character of
the accused itself is in dispute.

8
§ 55, Indian Evidence Act 1872.
9
Ratanlal & Dhirajlal, The Law of Evidence (2011).
10
Jagganath Prasad v. Ram Chandran, [1952] AIR All 408.
11
Id.
12
Vepa P. Sarthi, Law of Evidence (2017).
13 § 53, Indian Evidence Act 1872.
14 § 54, Indian Evidence Act 1872.

~7~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

I.SECTION 53: RELEVANCY OF GOOD CHARACTER

The main reason of introducing good character as relevant in a criminal trial is that it, to some
extent, negates the probability of the accused committing the crime. It roots from the
presumption that a person, who has been an unrighteous person throughout his life right up to
the alleged commission of crime, would not deviate from the same.
Further, discussion on the case of Habeeb Mohammad v. The State of Hyderabad,15should
also be made here. In that case, the court explained why the character of the accused in a
criminal case becomes relevant. The character of the accused is relevant for the reason that it
can pose an answer or a solution in explaining the conduct of the accused. Acts of the
accused person may be free of suspicion, or would be suspicious accordingly, if the character
of the person who has done the act is made known.16 Even while deciding the quantum of
punishment, the good character of the accused comes into play.
The Supreme Court of India, however, has also deemed that evidence of good character is
very weak evidence, and if there is any positive evidence which strongly point towards the
guilt of the accused, an evidence of good character cannot outweigh the guilt.17 Sometimes,
evidence as to the good character of the accused may be useful if the case made against the
accused is somewhat doubtful. In such circumstances, a piece of evidence which shows that
the the good character of the accused is contradicting the crime for which s/he is charged, that
piece of evidence may be used to tilt the balance in favour of the accused.18

II. SECTION 54: BAD CHARACTER WHEN RELEVANT

As per section 54 of the Indian Evidence Act, bad character of the accused is inadmissible,
unless any evidence of the good character of the accused is provided. The reason for the
enactment of this section is that any evidence regarding the bad character of the accused
would have a prejudicial effect in the mind of the judge regarding the accused, and would
curtail the impartial decision making. It has been held by the Calcutta High Court in as early
as 1915 that the principle of proving the guilt of a man is that it must be done through proof
of facts, and not through his character.19 The Calcutta High Court also referred to Stephen's
observations in the book General View of the Criminal Law of England. There, the eminent

15 Habeeb Mohammad v. The State of Hyderabad, [1954] AIR SC 51.

16 Id.
17 Sardar Sardul Singh Caveeshar v. State of Maharashtra, [1964] 2 SCR 378.
18 Id.
19 Amrita Lal Hazra v. Emperor, [1915] 42 Cal 957.

~8~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

jurist had noted that general bad character of a man is a weak reason for believing that the
man was involved in criminal activities.
The meaning of the term 'bad character' was defined in the Australian judgment of Attwood
Re.20 In that case, the accused was charged for murder. During the trial, he was questioned
about his previous conduct with the deceased person, where did he live, the manner in which
he lived, whether he was a debtor to the deceased, and whether there was any money he had
not returned. The issue that came up was that whether the answers to these questions would
show bad character of the accused.
The Court said that the expression 'bad character' has no particular legal, or technical
connotation. A definition of bad character can be regarded as directly opposite to good
character. However, bad character, as an independent matter, can be proved only as a reply to
any evidence adduced by the accused to his good character. Also, the bad character of the
accused is not irrelevant as to the proof of guilt. The reason of its exclusion is a policy
embedded in principle.21
There are, however, certain exceptions to this rule. The section itself enacts two exceptions to
this – firstly, bad character becomes relevant if evidence of the good character of the accused
is presented. Secondly, evidence regarding bad character would also become relevant if the
character of the accused is the matter of dispute in the trial.

A. WHEN EVIDENCE OF GOOD CHARACTER IS GIVEN

The first exception to the rule embodied in section 54 says that evidence regarding bad
character can be given as rebuttal when the accused himself has tendered evidence as to his
good character under section 53. When the accused adduces proof as to his own good
character, what he essentially does is puts a challenge to the prosecution and the case they
had made, by showing that his good character precludes him from committing the crime as
alleged. Then, the prosecution becomes at liberty to adduce proof as to the bad character of
the accused, as a manner of rebuttal to the same.

B. WHEN CHARACTER OF THE ACCUSED IS ITSELF AN ISSUE

The second exception deals with cases where the character of the accused is an issue in the
trial. Unless the character of the accused is itself an issue in the trial, no evidence regarding

20 Attwood Re, [1960] 102 CLR 353.

21 Id.

~9~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

the bad character can be given (this, of course excludes the situation mentioned in the first
exception to this rule). In the case of Ashok Dubey v. State of Madhya Pradesh,22 the
prosecution had put forward evidence regarding the perverted psychology and sexuality of
the accused, and this evidence was in the form of letters, diaries, and some conduct of the
accused. All this was done with a view to establishe the motive of the murder of the wife of
the accused. The Court held that such evidence is admissible, since the evidence was relevant
to the issue at hand.23
Examples of the same would be in a defamation case. Say, a person is being sued for the
offence of defamation, and the person wants to take the defence of truth in the face of the
charges. In such a case, the character of the person, as to whether he was being a truthful man
while making the allegedly defamatory statements or not would be admissible, and any
evidence which shows that his character is such that he habitually makes defamatory
statements would also be made admissible under this exception.
Another example, though strictly not an example of a criminal case, cane be given, for better
understanding of the circumstances when the character of the person itself is an issue. This
topic, for the sake of example, is being separated from the section at hand. The example is of
divorce on grounds of cruelty. In such a case, the question becomes, whether the spouse,
through his/her conduct, has inflicted cruelty or not? In such a case, the character of the
spouse becomes an issue in itself, and if it can be shown that the spouse through his/her
conduct had continually inflicted cruelty, then such evidence of bad character would be
included under this exception.

C. PREVIOUS CONVICTION

Another exception to the rule of bad character as embodied in section 54 is that of previous
convictions. Though the researcher feels that this exception is somewhat connected to the
first exception, this is still included as a separate topic for the reason that considerable
amount has been deliberated and said upon this topic.
The exception is that a previous conviction would be admissible as evidence against the
accused only on two ground – a) when he is made liable for enhanced punishment under
section 75 of the Indian Penal Code or any other special statutes (NDPS Act, for example) b)
when evidence of good character is given.

22 Ashok Dubey v. State of Madhya Pradesh, [1980] MPLJ 300.

23 Id.

~ 10 ~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

The first condition for making the previous conviction an admissible piece of evidence does
not relate directly to the discussion at hand, and thus is excluded. As regards to the second
condition, whereby the bad character is built up by a previous conviction, Lord Denning's
opinion becomes pertinent. He had said that previous convictions were 'raw materials upon
which bad reputation is built up'.24
He went on to say that a judgment of previous conviction is a matter of public knowledge and
they are different from previous instances of misconduct, in the sense that the latter has not
be tried and adjudged in a court of law. If one is to introuduce instances of misconduct as
evidence of bad character, same may lead to disputes. However, since a conviction is
essentially a judgment, its veracity is impeachable.25 Therefore, as per Explanation II of
section 54, previous conviction is a proof of bad character, and in the occassion that the
accused himself had invoked section 53 and given proof of his good character, the
prosecution can, under section 54, adduce a judgment of previous conviction of the accused
as a reply.

CONCLUSION

This research shows that evidence regarding character of a party can be adduced in two
occasions. Firstly, it can be adduced when the character of the party is an issue, that is, the
evidence of the character can be adduced per se. On other hand, the evidence regarding the
character of the party can be made admissible, subject to certain conditions, in cases to
resolve some other issue.26
Further, there are two views which are taken by two spheres in regards to character evidence.
The first is the one harboured by a person who is not deeply seeped in the legal education,
and whose reasons are dictated by common sense. This view says that the character of the
man should certainly make a strong case for determining whether or not any allegation
against the person. For example, if a man is habitually accustomed to lying and deceiving
people, a case of fraud in the court of law would hold much water. The courts, while
examining the veracity of the claims, should examine this character aspect of the man, and
see whether this habitual custom of the man would be relevant vis-a-vis the charges of fraud.

24 Hollington v. F. Hewthorn and Co. Ltd., [1943] AllER 235.

25 Id.
26 'The Most Controversial Areas in the Law of Evidence'<http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-
essays/criminal-law/the-most-controversial-areas-in-the-law-of-evidence-criminal-law-essay.php> last
accessed 20th August 2018.

~ 11 ~
 RELEVANCY OF CHARACTER IN THE LAW OF EVIDENCE
Trial Advocacy

However, there is a view that says exactly opposite to this. This is the view of the legal
sphere, who says that the law precludes the prosecution from adducing evidence regarding
bad character. This view also holds water. Merely because a man has the tendency of doing
something in the past does not mean he has committed the offence as alleged against him. In
such cases, if the prosecution adduces evidence regarding the bad character, it might put the
giving of justice in jeopardy, as such introduction would create prejudice in the mind of
judge.
The question then becomes, which view should prevail? One correct answer to this debate is
impossible. While the law must be accepted, the view of common sense cannot be also
precluded. In fact, recidivism is an observed phenomenon in a society, and while no prejudice
should not be caused to an accused, this matter must be also be looked into by the courts. As
a concluding note, the author can only hope that the court reads into the legislative intent of
the enacted provisions, as well as take into account societal interests, and decide according to
justice.

~ 12 ~