Definition
Facts connected with each other or with the facts in issue such that one makes the other probable.
Facts are relevant when they are logically connected to the facts in issue — relevancy is the gateway to admissibility of evidence in Indian courts.
Statutory Definition
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA), 2023, Section 2 (definitions) and Sections 3-46 (relevancy chapter, formerly IEA Sections 5-55).
Etymology & Origin
From Latin 'relevans' (present participle of 'relevare', to raise up, relieve — from 're-', again, and 'levare', to raise, lighten). A 'relevant' fact 'raises up' or 'bears upon' the issue in question — it has a bearing on the facts to be decided. 'Relevancy' in law is the quality of a fact that makes it useful to resolve the issue in the case.
Full Legal Analysis
Relevancy is the first gateway through which evidence must pass before it can be admitted in court. Under the BSA, 2023, and its predecessor the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, evidence is admissible only if it is relevant — and it is relevant only if it falls within one of the specific categories of relevant facts listed in the Act. The BSA follows a 'closed list' approach to relevancy — a fact is relevant only if the statute says it is, not merely because it might help the court reach the truth. This is a distinctive feature of Indian evidence law contrasted with the more flexible, common law approach.
Relevant facts under BSA, 2023 include: (1) Facts in issue — facts which are directly contested and on which rights and liabilities depend; (2) Facts forming part of the same transaction (res gestae — Section 7 BSA, formerly Section 6 IEA); (3) Facts that are occasion, cause, or effect of facts in issue (Section 8 BSA, formerly Section 7 IEA); (4) Facts showing motive, preparation, and conduct (Section 9 BSA, formerly Section 8 IEA); (5) Facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts (Sections 10-11 BSA); (6) Admissions (Sections 15-23 BSA, formerly Sections 17-23 IEA); (7) Confessions (Sections 23-28 BSA, formerly Sections 24-30 IEA); (8) Statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses (Section 29 BSA, formerly Section 32 IEA); (9) Judgments (Section 36 BSA, formerly Section 40-44 IEA); and (10) Expert opinion (Section 45 BSA, formerly Section 45 IEA).
The Supreme Court held that a tape-recorded conversation is a 'document' within the meaning of the Evidence Act and is admissible if relevant and authenticated. The Court held that the method by which evidence is obtained — even if obtained improperly — does not make it irrelevant; relevancy depends on the connection between the fact proved by the evidence and the facts in issue, not on the manner of obtaining the evidence. The Indian courts follow the position that relevant evidence is admissible even if obtained irregularly, though the court may take the manner of obtaining into account in assessing its weight. Electronic evidence is now specifically governed by BSA Sections 61-71.
Relevancy vs admissibility: relevancy is a question of law — whether a fact is of such a nature that it assists in determining the facts in issue. Admissibility is the consequence of relevancy — only relevant facts are admissible. All admissible evidence is relevant, but not all relevant evidence is admissible: some relevant evidence may be excluded by specific exclusionary rules (hearsay rule, privilege, Section 162 BNSS bar on statements to police, etc.). The relationship: relevance is necessary but not sufficient for admissibility.
For advocates, relevancy issues arise in: (1) objections to evidence at trial — 'my learned friend's question calls for irrelevant evidence'; (2) electronic evidence — establishing that electronic records are relevant and authentic under BSA; (3) similar fact evidence (Section 9 BSA) — evidence of prior acts to prove motive, preparation, or plan; and (4) expert opinion evidence (Section 45 BSA) — forensic, medical, technical evidence; the expert must be properly qualified and the opinion must be on a relevant scientific/technical matter.
This Term in Indian Statutes
Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023, 2023
"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."
R.M. Malkani: tape recording admissible if relevant — manner of obtaining does not affect relevancy; relevancy vs admissibility distinction; closed list approach — only BSA-listed relevant facts admitted; electronic evidence BSA Sections 61-71
