Evidence of Character – A Detailed Analysis

Introduction

In the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, "Evidence of Character" is a significant subject. The admissibility of a person's character as evidence in judicial proceedings is limited because it is often considered less reliable than direct evidence. However, in certain circumstances, the character of the accused, victim, or witness may be relevant in court.

In this article, we will discuss in detail what character evidence is, its types, its relevance in the Indian Evidence Act, and how it plays a role in the judicial system.

---

1. What is Evidence of Character?

"Character" refers to a person's moral conduct, reputation, and behavior. When a person's conduct and morality are presented as evidence in a court of law, it is called "Evidence of Character."

Purpose of Presenting Character Evidence

1. To establish what the general conduct of the accused or victim is.
2. To determine whether a person's past behavior is related to the crime in question.
3. To prove or challenge the credibility of a witness.

---

2. Status of Character Evidence in the Indian Evidence Act

The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, explicitly defines character evidence. Specifically, Sections 52 to 55 lay down the rules regarding its admissibility:

(A) Section 52 – Character Evidence in Civil Cases

"In civil cases, evidence of a person's conduct or moral character is not admissible unless such conduct is itself in question."

Explanation:

• In civil cases, evidence of a person's good or bad character is irrelevant.
• Exception: If the case itself is based on a person's character, such as divorce cases or defamation cases, then character evidence becomes relevant.

Example:
If a person is involved in a property dispute, mentioning their moral character would be irrelevant. However, if a defamation case is being heard, their character may be relevant.

---

(B) Section 53 – Character Evidence in Criminal Cases

"When a person is accused of a crime, they may present evidence of their good character."

Explanation:

• The accused has the right to present evidence of their good character.
• The prosecution can present evidence of the accused's bad character only if the accused has first presented evidence of their good character.

Example:
If a person is accused of theft and proves in court that they have always been an honest individual, the prosecution can then prove that the accused has previously committed crimes.

---

(C) Section 54 – Evidence of the Accused's Bad Character

"The bad character of the accused is relevant only when their character is in question."

Explanation:

• The prosecution cannot simply argue that the accused has a bad character and, therefore, must have committed the crime.
• However, if the accused has presented good character evidence, the prosecution can present bad character evidence.
• If the accused’s prior conduct is directly related to the case (e.g., committing the same crime before), then it becomes admissible.

Example:
If a person is accused of murder, the prosecution cannot argue that "the accused has always been a violent person, so they must have committed the crime." But if the accused has previously committed similar crimes, this can be presented as evidence.

---

(D) Section 55 – Relevance of Character in Civil Cases

"In civil cases, the character of a person is relevant when it affects the claim or defense."

Explanation:

• If a person's character directly influences the case, it can be admitted as evidence.
• This is particularly relevant in defamation, divorce, and family law matters.

Example:
If a woman files for divorce, claiming that her husband is immoral, then evidence regarding his character may be presented in court.

---

3. Types of Character Evidence

Character evidence is divided into two main types:

(A) Good Character Evidence

• Presented by the accused in their defense.
• Used to show that the accused has always been honest and law-abiding.
• Can be used to reduce punishment.

Example:
If a person is accused of fraud but proves that they have never deceived anyone in the past, it could influence the court's decision.

---

(B) Bad Character Evidence

• Presented by the prosecution, but only if the accused has claimed to have a good character.
• If the accused’s past behavior is similar to the crime in question, it may be presented in court.

Example:
If a person is accused of sexual assault, and it is proven that they have committed similar offenses before, this may be used in court.

---

4. Judicial Approach to Character Evidence

• Indian courts have ruled that character evidence should be accepted with caution.
• No person can be convicted solely based on character evidence.
• Character evidence is only accepted as corroborative evidence (supporting evidence).

---

Conclusion

The Indian Evidence Act limits the admissibility of character evidence.

• In civil cases: Character evidence is only relevant when the case itself is based on a person’s character.
• In criminal cases: The accused can present good character evidence, but the prosecution cannot present bad character evidence unless the accused has first presented good character evidence.

Thus, character evidence plays a significant but limited role in court. Courts accept it only as supplementary proof, and it cannot be the sole basis for conviction.