Production of documents
Section 162 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deals with production of documents. A witness summoned to produce a document shall, if it is in his possession or power, bring it to Court, notwithstanding any objection which there may be to its production or to its admissibility. The Act came into force on 01 Sep 1872. Repealed by section 170 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (47 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
A witness summoned to produce a document shall, if it is in his possession or power, bring it to Court, notwithstanding any objection which there may be to its production or to its admissibility. The validity of any such objection shall be decided on by the Court. The Court, if it sees fit, may inspect the document, unless it refers to matters of State, or take other evidence to enable it to determine on its admissibility. Translation of documents. ––If for such a purpose it is necessary to cause any document to be translated, the Court may, if it thinks fit, direct the translator to keep the contents secret, unless the document is to be given in evidence and, if the interpreter disobeys such direction, he shall be held to have committed an offence under section 166 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860).
Section 162, The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Act 1 of 1872).
Now in the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam
BSA 165 Production of documents Text carried over almost unchanged 93%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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.
-
Ladi vs State of Haryana
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: Discussed in context of whether tape-recorded conversation is inadmissible as statement made to police during investigation.
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.
-
… above two competing public interests, the Court upheld the interim order requiring the disclosure of the correspondence concerning the reappointment in respect of Justice S N Kumar. 27. The Court in S P Gupta was required to adjudicate claims resisting disclosure of documents in a judicial proceeding based on Sections 123 and 162 of the Indian Evidence Act. The balancing exercise was between the public harm resulting from a disclosure of documents relating to the affairs of the state and the public interest in the administration of justice. The public interest in the administration of justice pertained to the disposal of the case instituted …
-
… above two competing public interests, the Court upheld the interim order requiring the disclosure of the correspondence concerning the reappointment in respect of Justice S N Kumar. 27. The Court in S P Gupta was required to adjudicate claims resisting disclosure of documents in a judicial proceeding based on Sections 123 and 162 of the Indian Evidence Act. The balancing exercise was between the public harm resulting from a disclosure of documents relating to the affairs of the state and the public interest in the administration of justice. The public interest in the administration of justice pertained to the disposal of the case instituted …
-
… Smt. Lakshmi Kaimal had advanced a contention that Ext.P6 Caste Certificate issued by the Tahsildar, Thamarassery, is in the form of a letter addressed to the Investigating Officer during the stage of investigation and therefore is hit by Section 162 of the Indian Evidence Act. There is no need to labour much on the contention as PW8 Tahsildar had entered the box and had stated that he had obtained a report from the concerned Village officer and confirmed that PW1 is a member of the Cheraman community. Furthermore, in cross-examination of the investigating …
Questions about Section 162
What have the courts held on Section 162 of the Indian Evidence Act?
Ladi vs State of Haryana (02 May 2013) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Discussed in context of whether tape-recorded conversation is inadmissible as statement made to police during investigation.
How do I find court cases under Section 162 of the Indian Evidence Act?
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: IEA 162, section 162 IEA, section 162 of the Indian Evidence Act. 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 Ladi vs State of Haryana (02 May 2013).
What should I read with Section 162 of the Indian Evidence Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on Indian Penal Code 166 (Public servant disobeying law, with intent to cause injury to any person), so none of them can safely be read on its own. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BSA 165 (Production of documents), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 162 of the Indian Evidence Act come into force?
Section 162 of the Indian Evidence Act, cited as IEA 162, came into force on 01 Sep 1872, having been enacted on 15 Mar 1872. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 32. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc., is relevant1207 words
- 14. Facts showing existence of state of mind, or of body of bodily feeling1080 words
- 92. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement809 words
- 8. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct773 words
- 65B. Admissibility of electronic records743 words
- 3. Interpretation-clause667 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. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item e51341fa-7528-4327-9a57-5d194e16db6f). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.