Improper Admission or Rejection of Evidence

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023

 

TANMOY MUKHERJEE INSTITUTE OF JURIDICAL SCIENCE

Dr. Tanmoy Mukherjee

[Advocate]

 

Improper Admission or Rejection of Evidence-

Tanmoy Mukherjee

[Advocate]

Statutory Basis-

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 - Sec. 169 (Sec-167 IEA) 

Improper admission or rejection of evidence is not by itself a ground for new trial or, reversal of decision, if:

a) There is sufficient evidence to justify the decision independently of wrongfully admitted evidence, or

b) The rejected evidence, even if admitted , would not have changed the result.  

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Sec. 99

A decree shall not be reversed for misjoinder, non-joinder, or improper admission/rejection of evidence unless it affects the merits of the case.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sec. 511 (Sec. 465 CrPC)

No, finding/sentence/order shall be reversed on account of any error or irregularity in admission/rejection of evidence unless it has caused a failure of justice.

Judicial Approach-

-Rameshwar v. S.O. Rajasthan (AIR 1952 SC 54)

Facts: Conviction based partly on improper admission of child witness testimony.

Held: Conviction sustained because there was other reliable evidence -> improper admission not fatal.

-Radha Kishan v. S.O. Hyderabad (AIR 1956 SC 171)

Held: Mere rejection of some evidence is not a ground for reversal if other legal evidence supports the judgement.

-Narpal Singh v. S.O. Haryana (1977) 2 SCC 508

Held: Even if some evidence was improperly admitted, conviction can stand provided there is independent legal evidence.

-State of U.P. v Anil Singh (AIR 1988 SC 1998)

Held: Courts must not discard credible testimony merely because some evidence was wrongly admitted / rejected.

-Kalyan Kumar Gogoi v. Ashutosh Agnihotri (2011) 2 SCC 532

Held: Reiterated principle of Sec. 167: No reversal unless miscarriage of justice is shown.

-Shyamal Ghosh v. S.O. West Bengal (2012) 7 SCC 646

Held: Wrongful admission of some materials (confessions, documents) is not enough; appellate court must see if it influenced the outcome.

-State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram (2006) 12 SCC 254

Held: Court clarified that improperly admitted evidence may be ignored, but if remaining evidence is sufficient, conviction will stand.

-Hari Charan Kurmi v. S.O. Bihar (AIR 1964 SC 1184)

Held: Even if some confession/evidence is excluded, other corroborative evidence may sustain conviction.

Principles Emerging-

1. Not automatic ground - Admission or rejection does not by itself vitiate proceedings.

2. Effect on decision - The appellate/revisional court checks if the error materially affected the decision.

3. Doctrine of prejudice - Only if prejudice or miscarriage of justice is shown, retrial/reversal is ordered.

4. Independent evidence - If sufficient legal evidence exists without the tainted part, judgement stands.

Comparative Position-

Law Provision	Principle
BSA, Sec. 169 (Sec. 167 IEA)	Error in admission/rejection not fatal unless outcome affected.
CPC, Sec. 99	Decree not reversed unless merits affected.
BNSS, Sec. 511  (Sec. 465 CrPC)	Judgement not set aside unless failure of justice caused.

 

-Improper admission or rejection of evidence is not in itself a ground for a new trial or reversal under Section 169 BSA, Section 99 CPC, and Section 511 BNSS.

-Courts consistently hold that only when such error causes prejudice or miscarriage of justice, retrial or reversal will be granted