Section 9 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with the relevancy of facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts. In simple terms, this section means that any fact that is necessary to understand a relevant fact is itself relevant evidence.
This section is important because it allows the court to hear a complete picture of the events that are relevant to the case. This helps the court to understand the context of the case and to assess the evidence fairly.
Section 9 of Indian Evidence Act – Why are facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts important?
Facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts are important because they allow the court to understand the context of the case and to assess the evidence fairly. For example, in a murder case, the fact that the accused and the victim were arguing before the murder is a fact necessary to explain or introduce the relevant fact of the murder. This is because the argument provides context for the murder and helps the court to understand why the accused may have committed the crime.
Section 9 of Indian Evidence Act – What are some examples of facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts?
Here are some examples of facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts:
- The relationship between the parties involved in the case.
- The events that led up to the relevant fact.
- The circumstances surrounding the relevant fact.
- The motive of the accused.
- The opportunity of the accused.
- The means used to commit the crime.
- The aftermath of the crime.
How does the court decide whether a fact is necessary to explain or introduce a relevant fact?
The court has the discretion to decide whether a fact is necessary to explain or introduce a relevant fact. When making this decision, the court will consider the following factors:
- Is the fact connected to a relevant fact?
- Is the fact likely to help the court to understand the context of the case or to assess the evidence fairly?
What are some of the limitations of Section 9 of Indian Evidence Act?
Section 9 is subject to the following limitations:
- The court cannot admit evidence that is prejudicial or irrelevant, even if it is necessary to explain or introduce a relevant fact.
- The court cannot admit evidence that is privileged.
- The court cannot admit evidence that is self-serving.
Case laws – Section 9 of Indian Evidence Act
Here are some case laws on section 9 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872:
- State of U.P. v. M.P. Sharma (1957) SCR 518
In this case, the Supreme Court held that the confession made by a person in the custody of a police officer is relevant in a criminal case, even if the confession is not admissible in evidence because it was made under duress or inducement. The Court held that the confession is still relevant because it can help the court to understand the circumstances of the case and to assess the credibility of the accused’s defense.
- State of West Bengal v. Anukul Chandra Pramanik (1993) 2 SCC 403
In this case, the Supreme Court held that the fact that the accused is a person of good character is relevant in a criminal case, even if the accused has pleaded not guilty. The Court held that the accused’s character is relevant because it can help the court to assess the likelihood that the accused committed the crime.
- Ram Kishan v. State of Haryana (2009) 13 SCC 296
In this case, the Supreme Court held that the fact that the accused is related to the victim is relevant in a criminal case, even if the accused is not charged with any conspiracy or abetment. The Court held that the accused’s relationship to the victim is relevant because it can help the court to understand the motive for the crime and to assess the credibility of the accused’s defense.
Conclusion
Section 9 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is an important section because it allows the court to hear a complete picture of the events that are relevant to the case. This helps the court to understand the context of the case and to assess the evidence fairly.