Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction
Section 35 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction. A final judgment, order or decree of a competent Court or Tribunal, in the exercise of probate, matrimonial, admiralty or insolvency jurisdiction, which confers upon or takes away from any person any legal character, or which declares any person to be entitled to any such character, or to be entitle The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) A final judgment, order or decree of a competent Court or Tribunal, in the exercise of probate, matrimonial, admiralty or insolvency jurisdiction, which confers upon or takes away from any person any legal character, or which declares any person to be entitled to any such character, or to be entitled to any specific thing, not as against any specified person but absolutely, is relevant when the existence of any such legal character, or the title of any such person to any such thing, is relevant.
(2) Such judgment, order or decree is conclusive proof that--
(i) any legal character, which it confers accrued at the time when such judgment, order or decree came into operation;
(ii) any legal character, to which it declares any such person to be entitled, accrued to that person at the time when such judgment, order or decree declares it to have accrued to that person;
(iii) any legal character which it takes away from any such person ceased at the time from which such judgment, order or decree declared that it had ceased or should cease; and
(iv) anything to which it declares any person to be so entitled was the property of that person at the time from which such judgment, order or decree declares that it had been or should be his property.
Section 35, The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act 47 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Evidence Act
IEA 41 Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction Text carried over almost unchanged 99%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
-
Vishnu Dutt Sharma vs Daya Sapra
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 41, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The principle of res judicata and the concept of abuse of process of law do not operate to bar continuation of a civil suit merely because the accused has been acquitted in a related criminal proceeding arising from the same transaction. A judgment in a criminal proceeding, even if it results in acquittal, does not have binding effect on a parallel civil suit as the standards of proof, burden of proof, causes of action, and legal issues are fundamentally different between criminal and civil proceedings. The applicability of reverse burden provisions and statutory presumptions in criminal law must be strictly interpreted and applied with due regard to the presumption of innocence and constitutional rights of the accused, whereas in civil proceedings no such strict compliance is required. A creditor has the right to pursue both criminal and civil remedies concurrently, and the continuation of such proceedings is neither barred by law nor constitutes an abuse of process, provided the civil suit was not barred at the time of its filing.
On this section: Provides when judgments between the same parties are conclusive proof. The court noted that this section does not make criminal judgments conclusive in civil proceedings.
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.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… Normally, a judgment which binds only those who are parties to it, is known as judgment in personam . Judgments, mention of which are made in Section 41 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 35 of The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023), are referred to as judgment in rem. Though, definition of judgment in rem has not been provided anywhere, it has been understood as meaning a judgment which is conclusive not only against the parties, but also against the whole world. Perusal of the operative part of …
Questions about Section 35
What have the courts held on Section 35 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
Vishnu Dutt Sharma vs Daya Sapra (05 May 2009) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IEA 41, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Provides when judgments between the same parties are conclusive proof. The court noted that this section does not make criminal judgments conclusive in civil proceedings.
How do I find court cases under Section 35 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 35, section 35 BSA, section 35 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with Vishnu Dutt Sharma vs Daya Sapra (05 May 2009).
What should I read with Section 35 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and has it changed?
3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. It carries forward IEA 41 (Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 35 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam come into force?
Section 35 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, cited as BSA 35, 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.