Facts which are occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue or relevant facts
Section 5 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 deals with facts which are occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue or relevant facts. Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect, immediate or otherwise, of relevant facts, or facts in issue, or which constitute the state of things under which they happened, or which afforded an opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant. The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect, immediate or otherwise, of relevant facts, or facts in issue, or which constitute the state of things under which they happened, or which afforded an opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant.
Illustrations
(a) The question is, whether A robbed B. The facts that, shortly before the robbery, B went to a fair with money in his possession, and that he showed it, or mentioned the fact that he had it, to third persons, are relevant.
(b) The question is, whether A murdered B. Marks on the ground, produced by a struggle at or near the place where the murder was committed, are relevant facts.
(c) The question is, whether A poisoned B. The state of B's health before the symptoms ascribed to poison, and habits of B, known to A, which afforded an opportunity for the administration of poison, are relevant facts.
Section 5, The Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (Act 47 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Indian Evidence Act
IEA 7 Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue 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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
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.
-
Ritesh Sinha vs State of Uttar Pradesh Home Department Secretary
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 7, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The case resulted in a split decision with no clear ratio decidendi. Justice Desai held that: (1) Voice sample is physical non-testimonial evidence not covered by Article 20(3); (2) A Magistrate has ancillary or implied power under Section 5 of Identification of Prisoners Act and Section 53 of Criminal Procedure Code to authorize voice sample collection during investigation; (3) Voice prints are like fingerprints and fall within inclusive definition of 'measurements' in Prisoners Act; (4) Voice sample can be included in 'examination' under Section 53 through doctrine of ejusdem generis. Justice Alam held that: (1) There is no express or evidently applicable provision in law authorizing compulsion to give voice sample; (2) Explanation (a) to Section 53 deals only with material and tangible bodily substances, not voice; (3) Voice sample cannot be included in definition of 'measurements' in Prisoners Act; (4) Court should not invent law through interpretation; (5) Law must come from legislature, not through court process.
On this section: Relevancy of facts. Justice Desai cited this to support admissibility of tape recorded conversations if properly identified.
-
Ladi vs State of Haryana
Decided under Indian Evidence Act 7, 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 proposition that contemporaneous tape recording of a relevant conversation is a relevant fact and is admissible as 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 5
What have the courts held on Section 5 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam?
Ritesh Sinha vs State of Uttar Pradesh Home Department Secretary (02 Aug 2019) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under IEA 7, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Relevancy of facts. Justice Desai cited this to support admissibility of tape recorded conversations if properly identified. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2013 to 2019.
How do I find court cases under Section 5 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 5, section 5 BSA, section 5 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. 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 Ritesh Sinha vs State of Uttar Pradesh Home Department Secretary (02 Aug 2019).
What should I read with Section 5 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, and has it changed?
It carries forward IEA 7 (Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 5 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam come into force?
Section 5 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, cited as BSA 5, 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.