Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872: Relevancy of Facts Forming Part of the Same Transaction
Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 established when facts closely connected to a disputed event may be considered relevant. Its successor is Section 4 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), which has been in force since 1 July 2024.
What did Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act provide?
Section 6 - Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction.
Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places.
This rule recognises that an event may consist of several connected acts, words or circumstances. A court may consider those connected facts even if they are not themselves the ultimate facts to be proved.
Section 4 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023
Section 4 - Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction.
Facts which, though not in issue, are so connected with a fact in issue or a relevant fact as to form part of the same transaction, are relevant, whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places.
The updated wording expressly includes a connection to a relevant fact, as well as to a fact in issue. The statutory rule does not require every connected occurrence to happen at precisely the same place or moment. The court must assess whether the occurrences genuinely form one transaction. Read the official text of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
Four statutory illustrations explained
- Assault and surrounding statements: A is accused of murdering B by beating him. What A, B or bystanders said or did during the beating, or shortly before or after it as part of the transaction, is relevant. This can include spontaneous words closely tied to the event.
- Armed insurrection: A is accused of waging war against the Government of India during an armed insurrection involving destruction of property, attacks on troops and breaking open jails. These connected events may be relevant to the overall transaction even if A was not present at each location.
- Defamatory correspondence: A sues B for libel contained in one letter. Other letters concerning the same subject and forming part of the correspondence may be relevant even if they do not themselves contain the alleged libel.
- Successive delivery of goods: A disputes whether goods ordered from B were delivered. Where goods passed through several intermediaries, each delivery may be relevant to determining whether the goods reached A.
These examples reproduce the substance of the four illustrations found in both provisions; the explanations are for readers' understanding.
Meaning of res gestae and the same-transaction test
The expression res gestae is commonly used for facts and statements forming an integral part of the event under inquiry. The essential question is whether the act or statement is sufficiently connected to the transaction, rather than merely being a later narrative about it.
Courts may examine proximity in time and place, continuity of action, spontaneity and the relationship between the statement or conduct and the event. No single factor is necessarily decisive. A later statement made after an opportunity for reflection is not automatically admissible merely because it concerns the same incident.
Facts in issue and connected relevant facts
| Term | Meaning and example |
|---|---|
| Fact in issue | A central disputed fact, such as whether the accused caused the victim's death. |
| Relevant fact | A fact connected to a fact in issue in a way recognised by the evidence law, such as a spontaneous statement during the assault. |
| Same transaction | A connected course of events that may extend across different places or times but remains part of one occurrence or series. |
How courts apply the provision
Section 4 BSA is a rule of relevancy, not an automatic guarantee that every alleged statement is true or that every item of evidence is admissible regardless of other legal requirements. The court still assesses authenticity, reliability and applicable procedural rules. The doctrine can be significant when an immediate statement is relied upon despite the general concerns associated with hearsay.
For a practical analysis, identify the disputed fact, describe each surrounding event or statement, establish its timing and circumstances, and explain why the connection forms part of the same transaction rather than a separate occurrence.
Repeal and savings: which law applies?
Section 170(1) BSA repeals the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Section 170(2) BSA preserves the application of the earlier Act to an application, trial, inquiry, investigation, proceeding or appeal that was pending immediately before 1 July 2024. Those matters are dealt with under the former law as it stood before commencement. The applicability of the savings provision depends on the procedural status of the particular matter.
Official legal sources
- India Code: Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (official Act PDF) - see Sections 3, 4 and 170.
- India Code: Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 - Act record.
- National Crime Records Bureau: Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam section index.
This article provides general legal information and does not replace advice tailored to a particular case.