IEA33
Evidence Act to BSA

Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, the truth of facts therein stated

Text carried over almost unchanged 98% Repealed 01 Jul 2024

IEA 33 (Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, the truth of facts therein stated) corresponds most closely to BSA 27, Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, truth of facts therein stated, on a text comparison scoring 98 per cent. The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was repealed with effect from 01 Jul 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.

Repealed · Indian Evidence Act

Section 33 Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, the truth of facts therein stated

Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorized by law to take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable: Provided –– that the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest; that the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine; that the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding. Explanation. –– A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of this section.

STATEMENTS MADE UNDER SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES

In force · Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam

Section 27 Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding, truth of facts therein stated

Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, under the circumstances of the case, the Court considers unreasonable:

Provided that the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest; that the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine and the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding.

Explanation.--A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of this section.

Other provisions with similar text

The next closest matches, in order. Where a provision was split or merged, the answer is often more than one of these.

How this table was made, and what it is not

There is no official machine-readable correspondence between the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023. The Ministry published comparison charts for human readers; nothing exists that a computer can check. So this is not an official mapping and we do not present it as one.

What it measures is how alike the text of two provisions is. For each provision of the old enactment we compare its words against every provision of the new one and report the closest, with the score. That works here because the new codes are largely a renumbering rather than a rewrite: where a provision carried over near-verbatim the match is self-evidencing, and you can see it for yourself, because both texts are set out side by side on every entry.

Where the law genuinely changed, the score falls and the entry says no close match found rather than offering a guess. Those entries matter: they are where the reform actually did something.

Check before you cite. A high score means the words are alike, not that a court has held the provisions equivalent. For that, read both texts and the Gazette.

Full Evidence Act to BSA table

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. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.