A PROJECT

ON
A GENERAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF IEA, 1872
SUBJECT: EVIDENCE

SESSION: 2023-24

SUBMITTED ON: 30 APRIL 2024

SUBMITTEDBY: SUBMITTED TO:

Mr. Rahul Bansiwal Dr. Sandeep Singh

Roll No. 53 [Faculty Of Evidence]

Class - VIII Semester

Section - A

UNIVERSITY FIVE YEAR LAW COLLEGE

UNIVERSITY OF RAJASTHAN

JAIPUR
 A GENRAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872

DECLARATION

I,Rahul Bansiwal, hereby declare that thr project titled “A General Study On Sections
06 & 07 Of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 ” is based on the original research carried out by
me under the guidance and supervision of Dr. Sandeep Singh. The interpretations put forth
are based on my reading and understanding of the original text. The book, article and website etc.
which have been relied upon by me have been duly acknowledged at the respective place in the
text.

For the present project which I am submitting to the university, no degree or diploma has been
conferred on me before, either in this or in any university.

DATE: SIGNATURE
30 April 2024 [Rahul Bansiwal]

Roll No. 53

Semester VIII-A

Page 2 LAW OF EVIDENCE

 A GENRAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872

CERTIFICATE

Dr. Sandeep Singh Date: 30 April 2024

Faculty of Evidence

University Five Year Law College,

University of Rajasthan, Jaipur

This is to certify that Mr. Rahul Bansiwal student of VIII Semester, SEC-A of University

Five Year Law College, University of Rajasthan has carried out the project entitled “A General

Study On Sections 06 & 07 Of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 ” under my supervision and
guidance. It is an investigation report of a minor project. The student has completed research
work in my stipulated time and according to the norms prescribed for the purpose.

SIGNATURE

[Dr. Sandeep Singh]

Page 3 LAW OF EVIDENCE

 A GENRAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The present study relates to a comprehensive analysis of “A General Study On Sections

06 & 07 Of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 ” to give clear underrating of the subject in
broader perspective.

I am heartily grateful to, Dr. Sandeep Singh, Faculty of Evidence , University Five Year Law
College, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur, for having guided me through this long & difficult
journey that culminated in the present Project without whose co-operation, stimulating
inspiration, constant help, able guidance, innovative deliberations & continuous supervision
this work could not have seen the light of the day. Hence, I sincerely want to express my deep
sense of honor & gratitude towards him.

I shall be failing in my duty if I do not express my debt of gratitude to Dr. Akhil Kumar,
Director, University five-year law college, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur, for extending his
co-operation in the completion of this work.

I would also like to thank to all library staff & the remaining staff members of the Department
of Law, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur who have always extended an h& of co-operation
throughout the course of the research work.

SIGNATURE

[Rahul Bansiwal]

Page 4 LAW OF EVIDENCE

 A GENRAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872

Table of Contents

Declaration ....................................................................................................................
Certificate ......................................................................................................................
Acknowledgement.......................................................................................................

Chapter I : Introduction…………………….…………….……………….………..6
Chapter II : Section 6 : Doctrine of Res Gestae………….……………………..….7
Chapter III : Scope of Section 7…..….……………..….……………….…………9
Chapter IV: Conclusion……………...……………………………………..……..10
Bibliography………………………………………………………………….…...11

Page 5 LAW OF EVIDENCE

 A GENRAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872

CHAPTER - I
INTRODUCTION
The “evidence” in lieu of any offence or dispute, is the eye and ear of a court. A proper decision
in any case before a court is not possible without knowledge of true facts involved in a dispute.
Through the evidence the facts alleged by one party, and denied by the other require the Court to
ascertain whose contentions are true and for that purpose, the judge has to weigh the ‘evidence’
available in support of or contradiction to those contentions. Now the question arises, what does
the term ‘evidence’ mean?

The term ‘evidence’ is derived from the Latin word ‘evident’ or ‘evidere’, which means “to show
clearly, to discover clearly, to ascertain, to prove”.

 “Evidence is either written or unwritten, of allegations in issues between the parties”

 “Evidence is something, including testimony, documents and tangible objects that tends to
prove or disprove the existence of an alleged act.”

 “Evidence is something which ascertains the truth of the fact or print in question”.

Evidence under the Indian law means, “all statements which the Court permits or require to be
made before it by witnesses, in relation to matters of fact under enquiry. Such statements are
called oral evidence, all documents produced for the inspection of Court, are called documentary
evidence”.

The object of rules of evidence is to help the Courts to ascertain the truth and to avoid the
confusion in the minds of judges, which may result from the admission of evidence in excess.
Thus, the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was passed with the main object of preventing indiscipline
in the admission of evidence by enacting a correct and uniform rule of practice.

The law of evidence is the lex fori which govern the Courts; whether a writer is competent or not;
whether a certain fact requires to be proved by writing or not; whether a certain evidence proves
a fact or not; that is to be determined by the law of the country where the question arises, where
the remedy is sought to be enforced and where the Court sits to enforce it

Page 6 LAW OF EVIDENCE

 A GENRAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872

CHAPTER - II
SECTION 6 : DOCTRINE OF RES GESTAE

 SECTION 6

 Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction.––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.

Facts that are so linked to a fact in question that they form part of the same transaction, although
not in question, are relevant, whether they occurred at different times and places at the same time.

The principle embodied in law in Section 6, is usually referred to as the res gestae doctrine. The
facts that can be proved as a part of res gestae must be facts other than those in question but must
be linked to them. Although hearsay evidence is not admissible, it may be admissible in a court
of law when it is res gestae and may be reliable proof. The reason behind this is the spontaneity
and immediacy of such a statement that for concoction there is hardly any time. Such a statement
must, therefore, be concurrent with the acts that constitute the offense or at least immediately
thereafter.

Res gestae contains facts that are part of the same transaction. It is, therefore, appropriate to
examine what a transaction is, when it begins and when it ends. If any fact does not connect to
the main transaction, it is not a res gestae and therefore inadmissible. Res gestae includes
elements that completely fall outside the definition of modern hearsay, such as circumstantial
evidence of a state of mind, so-called “verbal acts“, verbal parts of acts, and certain non-verbal
behavior.

 DEFINITION OF TRANSACTION

A transaction, as the term used in this section, is defined as a crime, contract, error, or any other
subject of inquiry that may be in question by a single name. It includes both the immediate cause
and effect of an act or event and the other necessary antecedents of its occurrence at a reasonable
distance of time, pace and cause and effect.

Page 7 LAW OF EVIDENCE

 A GENRAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872

 RELEVANCE OF EVIDENCE

As one and the same part of the transaction, evidence relating to the main subject matter is
relevant. Two separate offenses may be so inseparably linked that the proof of one necessarily
involves proving the other, and in such a case proving that one cannot be excluded from
prosecution, as the other proves.

Proof of other offenses by the accused would be relevant and admissible if a nexus existed
between the offense charged and the other offenses or the two acts formed part of the same
transaction to fall within Section 6. Simply because it occurred at or about the same time as the
Trial offense res gestae, an offense that is completely separate and disconnected is not allowable.

 RELEVANCE OF FACTS

Facts which are, immediately or otherwise, the occasion, cause or effect of relevant facts or facts
in question, or which constitute the state of affairs under which they occurred, or which provided
an opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant. Facts forming part of the same
transaction are admissible in the previous section. Evidence relating to collateral facts is
admissible where such facts occur, where reasonable presumption as to the disputed matter has
been established, and where such evidence is reasonably conclusive. The section provides for the
admission of several classes of facts related to the transaction under inquiry which are-

1. As being the occasion or cause of a fact,

2. As giving an opportunity for its occurrence,

3. As being its effect, and

4. As constituting the state of things under which it happened.

Page 8 LAW OF EVIDENCE

 A GENRAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872

CHAPTER - III
SCOPE OF SECTION 7

 SECTION 7

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

The chain of events which make up the transaction may be so interwoven, making it difficult to
discriminate one from the other. In such circumstances, Section 7 of the Indian Evidence Act,
1872 (IEA) makes them relevant by embracing a larger area of facts, which though not possibly
form the part of the transactions but are connected with it in particular modes.

 Reason for admission

The reason for the admission of facts of this nature is that1, if it is desired to decide whether a
fact occurred or not, almost the first natural step is to ascertain whether there were facts at hand,
which were calculated to produce it or afford opportunity for its occurrence. It is a natural human
tendency to look to the cause when an effect is visible, or to look for the effect if the cause is
known. Moreover, in order to the proper appreciation of a fact, it is necessary to know the state
of things under which it occurred. Knowledge of the circumstances enabling a person to do the
act is also relevant. All these facts can be conveniently summed up as "contributory or
consequential factors

 Case Laws

 R v. Richardson (1758): In this English case, the deceased girl was alone in her cottage.
Being alone was considered to be an occasion for murder.
 Ratten v. Reginam (1971): The accused was prosecuted for shooting down his wife and he
took the defence of accident, the fact that the accused was unhappy with this wife and was
having an affair with another woman was held to be relevant, as it constituted the state of
things between the parties.

Page 9 LAW OF EVIDENCE

 A GENRAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872

CHAPTER - IV
CONCLUSION
Usually, evidence is brought to res gestae if it can not be brought to any other section of the
Indian evidence act. The intention of lawmakers was to avoid injustice where cases are dismissed
due to lack of evidence. If any statement under Section 6 is not admissible, it may be admissible
in accordance with Section 157 as corroborative evidence.

Court has always believed that this doctrine should never be unlimitedly extended. For this
reason, the “continuity of transaction” test was always considered by Indian courts. Any
statement made following a long gap that was not a response to the event is not admissible under
Section 6 of the Evidence Act. But courts allowed some statement that was spoken after a long
gap from the occurrence of the transaction because there was enough evidence that the victim
was still under the stress of excitement and so everything that was said was a reaction to the
occurrence.

The strength of Section 6 is its vagueness. There is no distinction in this section between the
word transaction used. It varies from case to case. Every criminal case on its own merit should
be judged. The evidence is admissible under Section 6 if it is proven to be part of the same
transaction, but whether it is reliable or not depends on the discretion of the judge.

Page 10 LAW OF EVIDENCE

 A GENRAL STUDY ON SECTIONS 06 & 07 OF INDIAN EVIENCE ACT, 1872

BIBLIOGRAPHY
 BOOK REFERENCES
1. The Law of Evidence, Batuk Lal, Central Law Publications, 24th Edition, 2023

 WEB SOURCES
1. https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/lawreports/indianevidenceactt/49.php

2. https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/to-the-point/ttp-indian-evidence-act/section-7-of-the-iea

3. https://blog.ipleaders.in/doctrine-of-res-gestae/

Page 11 LAW OF EVIDENCE