Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved
Section 38 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved. Any party to a suit or other proceeding may show that any judgment, order or decree which is relevant under section 34, 35 or 36, and which has been proved by the adverse party, was delivered by a Court not competent to deliver it, or was obtained by fraud or collusion. The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
Any party to a suit or other proceeding may show that any judgment, order or decree which is relevant under section 34, 35 or 36, and which has been proved by the adverse party, was delivered by a Court not competent to deliver it, or was obtained by fraud or collusion.
Section 38, The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act 47 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Evidence Act
IEA 44 Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved Text carried over almost unchanged 95%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
Questions about Section 38
What does Section 38 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam deal with?
Section 38 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam is headed "Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved". Any party to a suit or other proceeding may show that any judgment, order or decree which is relevant under section 34, 35 or 36, and which has been proved by the adverse party, was delivered by a Court not competent to deliver it, or was obtained by fraud or collusion.
How do I find court cases under Section 38 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 38, section 38 BSA, section 38 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome.
What should I read with Section 38 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 34 (Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial), section 35 (Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc., jurisdiction), section 36 (Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in section 35), so none of them can safely be read on its own. It carries forward IEA 44 (Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court, may be proved), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 38 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam come into force?
Section 38 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, cited as BSA 38, 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 14 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.