Refreshing memory
Section 162 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with refreshing memory. A witness may, while under examination, refresh his memory by referring to any writing made by himself at the time of the transaction concerning which he is questioned, or so soon afterwards that the Court considers it likely that the transaction was at that time fresh in his memory: Provided that t The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) A witness may, while under examination, refresh his memory by referring to any writing made by himself at the time of the transaction concerning which he is questioned, or so soon afterwards that the Court considers it likely that the transaction was at that time fresh in his memory:
Provided that the witness may also refer to any such writing made by any other person, and read by the witness within the time aforesaid, if when he read it, he knew it to be correct.
(2) Whenever a witness may refresh his memory by reference to any document, he may, with the permission of the Court, refer to a copy of such document:
Provided that the Court be satisfied that there is sufficient reason for the non-production of the original:
Provided further that an expert may refresh his memory by reference to professional treatises.
Section 162, The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act 47 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Evidence Act
IEA 159 Refreshing memory Text carried over almost unchanged 98%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
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.
-
Ghulam Hassan Beigh vs Mohammad Maqbool Magrey
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 159, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
At the stage of framing charges under Sections 227 and 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the trial court must apply its judicial mind and sift the evidence placed before it by the prosecution for the limited purpose of determining whether a prima facie case has been made out. The court cannot conduct a mini-trial or rely solely on post-mortem reports to determine the nexus between alleged assault and death. The post-mortem report is not substantive evidence but merely a previous statement of the doctor; only the doctor's oral testimony in court constitutes substantive evidence. Whether the cause of death has any nexus with the alleged assault can only be determined after recording oral evidence of eye witnesses and the medical officer as an expert witness. The determination of whether a case falls under Section 302 IPC (murder) or Section 304 Part II IPC (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) must be made only after evaluation of the entire oral evidence led by both prosecution and defence at the end of the trial, not at the charge-framing stage. If a prima facie case is made out based on the materials placed by the prosecution, even if those materials give rise to strong suspicion, the charge should be framed in accordance with the case put up by the prosecution, and the accused should be given the opportunity to defend against the higher charge at trial.
On this section: Refreshing memory - post-mortem report can be used to refresh doctor's memory during examination
-
Ladi vs State of Haryana
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 159, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An accused has an indefeasible right to fair trial and equal opportunity to prove his innocence. Electronically recorded conversations are admissible as documentary evidence under the amended Indian Evidence Act and Information Technology Act 2000 when: (1) the conversation is relevant to matters in issue; (2) the voice is properly identified; and (3) the accuracy of the recorded conversation is proved by eliminating the possibility of tampering, erasure, addition or manipulation. Courts must exercise their powers under Section 311 CrPC and Section 165 Evidence Act to examine witnesses and elicit evidence essential to just decision, taking a participatory role in trials to arrive at truth. When a witness has not been cross-examined on material evidence that subsequently emerges, courts should grant opportunity for re-examination to ensure fair trial.
On this section: Cited for the principle that transcripts of tape-recorded conversations can be used by witness to refresh memory and contents can be brought on record by direct oral evidence.
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 162
What have the courts held on Section 162 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
Ghulam Hassan Beigh vs Mohammad Maqbool Magrey (26 Jul 2022) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IEA 159, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Refreshing memory - post-mortem report can be used to refresh doctor's memory during examination. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2013 to 2022.
How do I find court cases under Section 162 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 162, section 162 BSA, section 162 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. People searching for it also type 162 bsa act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Ghulam Hassan Beigh vs Mohammad Maqbool Magrey (26 Jul 2022).
What should I read with Section 162 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and has it changed?
1 other provision in this corpus refers back to it. It carries forward IEA 159 (Refreshing memory), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 162 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam come into force?
Section 162 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, cited as BSA 162, 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.