Relevancy and Admissibility in Evidence Law: A Comprehensive Analysis

Introduction

The concepts of relevancy and admissibility are fundamental to the law of evidence, determining what evidence can be presented in a court of law. Though often used interchangeably, these terms have distinct legal meanings and implications. Relevancy pertains to the logical connection between a fact and the matter at issue, while admissibility is governed by legal rules that determine whether a piece of relevant evidence can be presented in court.

This article provides an in-depth analysis of these concepts under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, their distinctions, and judicial interpretations that shape their application in Indian courts.

---

Understanding Relevancy in Law

Definition of Relevancy

Relevancy, as defined under Section 5 to Section 55 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, refers to the relationship between facts that help in proving or disproving the existence of the main fact in question. If a fact is logically connected to the issue and helps in decision-making, it is deemed relevant.

Types of Relevancy

Relevancy is categorized into two types:

1. Logical Relevancy

A fact is logically relevant if it has a rational connection with the fact in issue. For example, in a murder case, if the accused had purchased a weapon similar to the one used in the crime, this fact is logically relevant. However, logical relevancy alone does not ensure its admissibility in court.

2. Legal Relevancy

Legal relevancy refers to facts that are deemed relevant by law and are admissible as per legal provisions. Not all logically relevant facts are admissible unless they comply with the rules of the Indian Evidence Act.

Relevant Facts Under the Indian Evidence Act

The Act lists various categories of relevant facts, including:

1. Facts forming part of the same transaction (Section 6 – Res Gestae)

   • Statements and actions occurring at the same time as the incident are relevant.
   • Example: A person witnessing a murder and immediately shouting the name of the accused is relevant.

2. Facts which are the cause or effect of facts in issue (Section 7)

   • Cause-and-effect relationships are considered relevant.
   • Example: The presence of bloodstains on a suspect’s clothes in a murder case.

3. Motive, preparation, and conduct (Sections 8 and 9)

   • Motive and conduct before or after the crime can be relevant.
   • Example: If the accused had a strong motive (revenge) against the victim, it becomes a relevant fact.

4. Admissions and confessions (Sections 17 to 31)

   • Statements made by parties acknowledging facts against their interest are relevant.

5. Statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses (Section 32 – Dying Declaration)

   • A dying person’s statement regarding the cause of their death is relevant.

6. Expert opinion (Sections 45 to 51)

   • Opinions from forensic experts, doctors, handwriting analysts, etc., are relevant.

---

Understanding Admissibility in Law

Definition of Admissibility

While relevancy determines whether a fact is logically connected to the issue, admissibility determines whether it can be presented in court. Even if evidence is relevant, it may be inadmissible due to legal restrictions.

Factors Determining Admissibility

The admissibility of evidence is subject to several factors, including:

1. Hearsay Rule (Section 60)

   • Hearsay evidence (statements made by a third party not present in court) is generally inadmissible.
   • Exception: Dying declarations, expert opinions, and business records.

2. Confessions (Sections 24-30)

   • Confessions obtained through coercion or undue influence are inadmissible.
   • Example: A confession made under police torture cannot be used against the accused.

3. Illegally Obtained Evidence

   • Indian courts follow a flexible approach to illegally obtained evidence. If the evidence is relevant and reliable, it may still be admitted.
   • Example: A phone recording obtained without consent may still be admissible.

4. Privileged Communications (Sections 122-132)

   • Communications between husband and wife, lawyer and client, state secrets, and judges are protected.

5. Best Evidence Rule (Section 91-92)

   • Primary evidence (original documents) is preferred over secondary evidence (photocopies).

---

Key Differences Between Relevancy and Admissibility

Aspect	Relevancy	Admissibility
Definition	Logical connection of a fact with the issue	Legally acceptable evidence
Scope	Broad, based on reasoning and common sense	Narrow, governed by legal rules
Determining Factor	Sections 5-55 of the Indian Evidence Act	Specific legal provisions and judicial discretion
Example	A witness saw the accused at the crime scene	If the witness is legally competent, their statement will be admissible

---

Judicial Interpretations of Relevancy and Admissibility

1. Pakala Narayan Swami v. Emperor (1939)

• The court held that relevant statements made by the accused before death are admissible under Section 32 (Dying Declaration).

2. State of U.P. v. Raj Narain (1975)

• Established that certain privileged documents (e.g., government files) may be inadmissible in public interest.

3. R.M. Malkani v. State of Maharashtra (1973)

• Held that illegally recorded telephone conversations can be admissible if relevant to the case.

4. Ram Bihari Yadav v. State of Bihar (1998)

• Clarified that all admissible facts must be relevant, but not all relevant facts are admissible.

---

Conclusion

The concepts of relevancy and admissibility are crucial to determining the quality and reliability of evidence in legal proceedings. While relevancy ensures that evidence logically relates to the case, admissibility ensures that the evidence is legally acceptable in court. Indian courts have evolved flexible yet stringent rules regarding admissibility to maintain fairness in justice delivery.

Key Takeaways

✔ All admissible evidence must be relevant, but not all relevant evidence is admissible.
✔ Relevancy is based on logic, while admissibility is based on legal provisions.
✔ Judicial precedents play a significant role in shaping admissibility rules.

The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, along with judicial interpretations, continues to shape the evolving landscape of evidence law, ensuring a fair and just legal system.