Evidence as to affairs of State
Section 129 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with evidence as to affairs of State. No one shall be permitted to give any evidence derived from unpublished official records relating to any affairs of State, except with the permission of the officer at the head of the department concerned, who shall give or withhold such permission as he thinks fit. The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
No one shall be permitted to give any evidence derived from unpublished official records relating to any affairs of State, except with the permission of the officer at the head of the department concerned, who shall give or withhold such permission as he thinks fit.
Section 129, The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act 47 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Evidence Act
IEA 123 Evidence as to affairs of State Text carried over almost unchanged 100%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
Referred to by 5
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Draft stage of translated version) s. 94
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Draft stage of translated version) s. 328
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita s. 94 Summons to produce document or other thing
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita s. 328 Evidence of officers of Mint
- National Sports Governance Act s. 24 Powers of Tribunal
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Yashwant Sinha v. CBI
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 123, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Judgement of Main Case order-4.pdf 2019-04-10. Review Pet (Crl) 46/2019. Gogoi CJI/Kaul + Joseph concurrence. DATE-CHECK flagged 2016-06-01 / 2015-11-24 MoD-note fact dates (false positive); body is the named reportable, digitally signed 2019.04.10. Skip same-CNR order-16.pdf 2019-11-14 (pronouncement ROP) and do not attach the Rafale merits PDF. OSA 3/5 do not bar publication or production of documents already in the public domain; IEA 123 privilege is only for unpublished official records.
On this section: Successor of IEA 123 (mapping.csv near-identical, score 1). The unpublished-records limit on affairs-of-State privilege carries to BSA 129.
-
Sas Realtors Pvt. LTD vs Sri Maruti Electrical Enterprises
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 123, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The Limitation Act, 1963 applies to applications filed under Sections 7 and 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 from the Code's commencement on 01.12.2016. Time-barred debts cannot trigger the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. The expression 'debt due' in the Code refers only to debts that are not time-barred and are legally recoverable. Article 137 of the Limitation Act prescribes a three-year limitation period for applications under Sections 7 and 9, and applications filed beyond this period are barred unless delay is condoned under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
On this section: Referenced in Section 424(2) of Companies Act regarding requisitioning public records.
-
Director General (road Development) National Highways Authority of India vs Aam Aadmi Lokmanch
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 123, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The National Green Tribunal has jurisdiction under Sections 14, 15, 16, and 17 of the NGT Act, 2010, to award compensation for death and environmental damage resulting from violation of enactments listed in Schedule I, including the Environment Protection Act, 1986. The NGT can exercise this jurisdiction on application by any person aggrieved, including representative organizations, without requiring application by legal representatives of deceased. However, while NGT has power to issue general directions for environmental protection based on adjudication of cases before it, such directions must be based on scientific evidence, expert reports, and proper procedure allowing parties to object and make representations. Sweeping blanket directions without such foundation are procedurally indefensible and can be set aside. Similarly, state government's exercise of power under Section 154 of MRTP Act to modify development plans must be based on adequate reasons and supporting material, and cannot be arbitrary or devoid of rationale. The National Highways Authority of India owes a duty of care to highway users to maintain highways in safe condition, including drainage systems and culverts, and can be held liable in tort for breach of this duty when it fails to take reasonable steps after being notified of deficiencies and foreseeable dangers.
On this section: Applied to NGT's procedure for receiving evidence
-
Sumathi Ravichandran vs The Inspector of Police
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 123, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Sanction files containing confidential communications between government departments and authorities are privileged documents under Sections 123 and 124 of the Indian Evidence Act. An accused person does not have the right to peruse such privileged sanction files, even for purposes of mounting an effective defense. However, the trial court may examine the sanction file to satisfy itself that the sanctioning authority applied its mind to the facts placed before it. This approach balances the accused's right to fair trial with the state's legitimate interest in protecting confidential government communications relating to affairs of state.
On this section: Evidence as to affairs of State; applied to hold that sanction file comprises unpublished official records relating to affairs of state and is privileged
-
Punjab Agircultural Univ. vs Kuldip Chand Bhargav
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 123, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Confidential official records of a public institution, including orders of administrative heads, recommendations of senior officers, legal advice from institutional legal advisors, and internal correspondence relating to employment matters, are protected from disclosure under Sections 123, 124, and 126 of the Indian Evidence Act. Such protection is necessary for the proper functioning of public institutions and cannot be overridden by a trial court's order to produce these documents in civil litigation, even when the documents may be relevant to the case.
On this section: Evidence as to affairs of State - No one shall be permitted to give evidence derived from unpublished official records relating to affairs of State except with permission of the officer at the head of the department. Applied to protect confidential university records from disclosure.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 129
What have the courts held on Section 129 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
Yashwant Sinha v. CBI (10 Apr 2019) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IEA 123, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Successor of IEA 123 (mapping.csv near-identical, score 1). The unpublished-records limit on affairs-of-State privilege carries to BSA 129. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below, 3 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2007 to 2020.
How do I find court cases under Section 129 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BSA 129, section 129 BSA, section 129 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. People searching for it also type bsa troop 129. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Yashwant Sinha v. CBI (10 Apr 2019).
What should I read with Section 129 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and has it changed?
5 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. It carries forward IEA 123 (Evidence as to affairs of State), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 129 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam come into force?
Section 129 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, cited as BSA 129, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 26. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant1128 words
- 12. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body or bodily feeling1076 words
- 95. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement815 words
- 2. Definitions794 words
- 6. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct773 words
- 63. Admissibility of electronic records764 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.