Uganda
Evidence Act
Chapter 6
- Commenced on 1 August 1909
- [This is the version of this document at 31 December 2000.]
- [Note: The version of the Act as at 31 December 2000 was revised and consolidated by the Law Reform Commission of Uganda. All subsequent amendments have been researched and applied by Laws.Africa for ULII.]
Part I – Preliminary
1. Application
This Act shall apply to all judicial proceedings in or before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal, the High Court and all courts established under the Magistrates Courts Act, but not to affidavits presented to any court or officer nor to proceedings before an arbitrator.2. Interpretation
3. Presumptions
Part II – Relevancy of facts
4. Evidence may be given of facts in issue and relevant facts
Subject to any other law, evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence or nonexistence of every fact in issue, and of such other facts as are hereafter declared to be relevant, and of no others.5. Relevancy of facts forming part of the 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.6. Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of facts in issue, etc.
Facts which are the occasion, the cause or the effect, immediate or otherwise, of relevant facts, or facts in issue, or which constitute the state of things under which they happened, or which afforded an opportunity for their occurrence or transaction, are relevant.7. Facts showing motive or preparation; conduct influencing or influenced by a fact in issue or relevant fact
8. Facts necessary to explain or introduce relevant facts
Facts necessary to explain or introduce a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which support or rebut an inference suggested by a fact in issue or relevant fact, or which establish the identity of any thing or person whose identity is relevant, or fix the time or place at which any fact in issue or relevant fact happened, or which show the relation of parties by whom any such fact was transacted, are relevant insofar as they are necessary for that purpose.9. Things said or done by conspirator in reference to common design
Where there is reasonable ground to believe that two or more persons have conspired together to commit an offence or an actionable wrong, anything said, done or written by any one of those persons in reference to their common intention, after the time when that intention was first entertained by any one of them, is a relevant fact as against each of the persons believed to be so conspiring, as well as for the purpose of proving the existence of the conspiracy and for the purpose of showing that any such person was a party to it.10. When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant
Facts not otherwise relevant are relevant—11. In suit for damages, facts tending to enable the court to determine amount are relevant
In suits in which damages are claimed, any fact which will enable the court to determine the amount of damages which ought to be awarded is relevant.12. Facts relevant when right or custom is in question
Where the question is as to the existence of any right or custom, the following facts are relevant—13. Facts showing existence of state of mind or of body or bodily feeling
Facts showing the existence of any state of mind, such as intention, knowledge, good faith, negligence, rashness, ill will or good will towards any particular person, or showing the existence of any state of body or bodily feeling, are relevant, when the existence of any such state of mind or body or bodily feeling is in issue or relevant.Explanation 1 — A fact relevant as showing the existence of a relevant state of mind must show that the state of mind exists, not generally, but in reference to the particular matter in question.Explanation 2 — But where, upon the trial of a person accused of an offence, the previous commission by the accused of an offence is relevant within the meaning of this section, the previous conviction of that person shall also be a relevant fact.14. Facts bearing on question of whether act was accidental or intentional
When there is a question of whether an act was accidental or intentional, or done with a particular knowledge or intention, the fact that such act formed part of a series of similar occurrences, in each of which the person doing the act was concerned, is relevant.15. Existence of course of business, when relevant
When there is a question whether a particular act was done, the existence of any course of business, according to which it naturally would have been done, is a relevant fact.Admissions
16. Admission defined
An admission is a statement, oral or documentary, which suggests any inference as to any fact in issue or relevant fact, and which is made by any of the persons, and in the circumstances, hereinafter mentioned.17. Admission by party to proceeding or his or her agent; by party in representative character; by party interested in subject matter
18. Admissions by persons whose position must be proved as against party to suit
Statements made by persons whose position or liability it is necessary to prove as against any party to the suit are admissions, if those statements would be relevant as against those persons in relation to such position or liability in a suit brought by or against them, and if they are made while the person making them occupies such position or is subject to such liability.19. Admissions by persons expressly referred to by party to suit
Statements made by persons to whom a party to the suit has expressly referred for information in reference to a matter in dispute are admissions.20. Proof of admissions against persons making them, and by or on their behalf
Admissions are relevant and may be proved as against the person who makes them, or his or her representative in interest; but they cannot be proved by or on behalf of the person who makes them or by his or her representative in interest, except in the following cases—21. When oral admissions as to contents of documents are relevant
Oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant, unless the party proposing to prove them shows that he or she is entitled to give secondary evidence of the contents of the document under the rules hereafter contained, or unless the genuineness of a document produced is in question.22. Admissions in civil cases, when relevant
In civil cases, no admission is relevant if it is made either upon an express condition that evidence of it is not to be given, or in circumstances from which the court can infer that the parties agreed together that evidence of it should not be given.Explanation — Nothing in this section shall be taken to exempt any advocate from giving evidence of any matter of which he or she may be compelled to give evidence under section 125.23. Confessions to police officers and power of Minister to make rules
24. When confessions irrelevant
A confession made by an accused person is irrelevant if the making of the confession appears to the court, having regard to the state of mind of the accused person and to all the circumstances, to have been caused by any violence, force, threat, inducement or promise calculated in the opinion of the court to cause an untrue confession to be made.25. Confession made after removal of impression caused by violence, etc.
If such confession as is referred to in section 24 is made after the impression caused by any such violence, force, threat, inducement or promise has, in the opinion of the court, been fully removed, it is relevant.26. Confession otherwise relevant not to become irrelevant because of promise of secrecy, etc.
If such a confession is otherwise relevant, it does not become irrelevant merely because it was made under a promise of secrecy, or in consequence of a deception practised on the accused person for the purpose of obtaining it, or when he or she was drunk, or because it was made in answer to questions which he or she need not have answered, whatever may have been the form of those questions, or because he or she was not warned that he or she was not bound to make the confession, and that evidence of it might be given against him or her.27. Consideration of proved confession affecting person making it and others jointly under trial for same offence
When more persons than one are being tried jointly for the same offence, and a confession made by one of those persons affecting himself or herself and some other of those persons is proved, the court may take into consideration such confession as against that other person as well as against the person who makes the confession.Explanation — “Offence”, as used in this section, includes the abetment of, or attempt to commit, the offence.28. Admissions not conclusive proof, but may estop
Admissions are not conclusive proof of the matters admitted, but they may operate as estoppels under the provisions hereafter contained.29. Information leading to discovery of facts
Notwithstanding sections 23 and 24, when any fact is deposed to as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, so much of that information, whether it amounts to a confession or not, as relates distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, may be proved.Statements by persons who cannot be called as witnesses
30. Cases in which statement of relevant fact by person who is dead or cannot be found, etc. is relevant
Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who is dead, or who cannot be found, or who has become incapable of giving evidence, or whose attendance cannot be procured without an amount of delay or expense which in the circumstances of the case appears to the court unreasonable, are themselves relevant facts in the following cases—31. Relevancy of certain evidence for proving, in subsequent proceeding or later stage of the same proceeding, the truth of facts stated in the evidence
Evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving in a subsequent judicial proceeding or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness is dead or cannot be found, or is incapable of giving evidence, or is kept out of the way by the adverse party, or if his or her presence cannot be obtained without an amount of delay or expense which, in the circumstances of the case, the court considers unreasonable if—(a)the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest;(b)the adverse party in the first proceeding had the right and opportunity to cross-examine; and(c)the questions in issue were substantially the same in the first as in the second proceeding.Explanation — A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of this section.Statements made in special circumstances
32. Entries in books of account, when relevant
Entries in books of account, regularly kept in the course of business, are relevant whenever they refer to a matter into which the court has to inquire, but such statement shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability.33. Relevancy of entry in public record, made in performance of duty
An entry in any public or other official book, register or record, stating a fact in issue or relevant fact, and made by a public servant in the discharge of his or her official duty or by any other person in performance of a duty specially enjoined by the law of the country in which the book, register or record is kept, is itself a relevant fact.34. Relevancy of statements in maps, charts and plans
Statements of facts in issue or relevant facts, made in published maps or charts generally offered for public sale or in maps or plans made under the authority of the Government, as to matters usually represented or stated in such maps, charts or plans, are themselves relevant facts.35. Relevancy of statement as to fact of public nature contained in certain Acts or notifications
When the court has to form an opinion as to the existence of any fact of a public nature, any statement of it—36. Relevancy of statements as to any law contained in law books
When the court has to form an opinion as to a law of any country, any statement of that law contained in a book purporting to be printed or published under the authority of the Government of that country and to contain any such law, and any report of the ruling of the courts of that country contained in a book purporting to be a report of such rulings, are relevant.How much of a statement is to be proved
37. What evidence to be given when statement forms part of a statement, conversation, document, book or series of letters or papers
When any statement of which evidence is given forms part of a longer statement, or of a conversation or part of an isolated document, or is contained in a document which forms part of a book, or of a connected series of letters or papers, evidence shall be given of so much and no more of the statement, conversation, document, book or series of letters or papers as the court considers necessary in that particular case to the full understanding of the nature and effect of the statement, and of the circumstances in which it was made.Judgments of courts of justice, when relevant
38. Previous judgments relevant to bar a second suit or trial
The existence of any judgment, order or decree which by law prevents any court from taking cognisance of a suit or holding a trial is a relevant fact when the question is whether the court ought to take cognisance of the suit or to hold the trial.39. Relevancy of certain judgments in probate, etc. jurisdiction
40. Relevancy and effect of judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in section 39
Judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in section 39, are relevant if they relate to matters of a public nature relevant to the inquiry; but those judgments, orders or decrees are not conclusive proof of that which they state.41. Judgments, etc. other than those mentioned in sections 38 to 40, when relevant
Judgments, orders or decrees, other than those mentioned in sections 38, 39 and 40, are irrelevant unless the existence of the judgment, order or decree is a fact in issue, or is relevant under some other provision of this Act.42. Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of the court, may be proved
Any party to a suit or other proceeding may show that any judgment, order or decree which is relevant under section 38, 39 or 40, and which has been proved by the adverse party, was delivered by a court not competent to deliver it, or was obtained by fraud or collusion.Opinions of third persons, when relevant
43. Opinions of experts
When the court has to form an opinion upon a point of foreign law, or of science or art, or as to identity of handwriting or finger impressions, the opinions upon that point of persons specially skilled in that foreign law, science or art, or in questions as to the identity of handwriting or finger impressions, are relevant facts. Such persons are called experts.44. Facts bearing upon opinions of experts
Facts, not otherwise relevant, are relevant if they support or are inconsistent with the opinions of experts, when those opinions are relevant.45. Opinion as to handwriting, when relevant
When the court has to form an opinion as to the person by whom any document was written or signed, the opinion of any person acquainted with the handwriting of the person by whom it is supposed to be written or signed that it was or was not written or signed by that person is a relevant fact.Explanation — A person is said to be acquainted with the handwriting of another person when he or she has seen that person write, or when he or she has received documents purporting to be written by that person in answer to documents written by himself or herself or under his or her authority and addressed to that person, or when, in the ordinary course of business, documents purporting to be written by that person have been habitually submitted to him or her.46. Opinion as to existence of right or custom, when relevant
When the court has to form an opinion as to the existence of any general custom or right, the opinions as to the existence of that custom or right, of persons who would be likely to know of its existence if it existed, are relevant.Explanation — The expression “general custom or right” includes customs or rights common to any considerable class of persons.47. Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant
When the court has to form an opinion as to—48. Opinion on relationship, when relevant
When the court has to form an opinion as to the relationship of one person to another, the opinion, expressed by conduct, as to the existence of the relationship, of any person who, as a member of the family or otherwise, has special means of knowledge on the subject, is a relevant fact; but such opinion shall not be sufficient to prove a marriage in proceedings under the Divorce Act, or in prosecutions under section 153 of the Penal Code Act.49. Grounds of opinion, when relevant
Whenever the opinion of any living person is relevant, the grounds on which that opinion is based are also relevant.Character, when relevant
50. In civil cases, character to prove conduct imputed irrelevant
In civil cases the fact that the character of any person concerned is such as to render probable or improbable any conduct imputed to him or her is irrelevant, except insofar as that character appears from facts otherwise relevant.51. In criminal cases, previous good character relevant
In criminal proceedings the fact that the person accused is of a good character is relevant.52. Bad character in criminal proceedings only relevant in certain circumstances
In criminal proceedings, subject to section 133(2) of the Magistrates Courts Act and section 98 of the Trial on Indictments Act, the fact that an accused person has a bad character is irrelevant, unless—53. Incriminating questions
In criminal proceedings an accused person giving evidence may be asked any question in cross-examination that would tend to incriminate him or her as to the offence with which he or she is charged.54. Character as affecting damages
In civil cases the fact that the character of any person is such as to affect the amount of damages which he or she ought to receive is relevant.Explanation — In sections 50, 51, 52 and 54 the word “character” includes both reputation and disposition; but, except as provided in section 52, evidence may be given only of general reputation and general disposition, and not of particular acts by which reputation or disposition were shown.Part III – Proof
Facts which need not be proved
55. Facts judicially noticeable need not be proved
No fact of which the court will take judicial notice need be proved.56. Facts of which court must take judicial notice
57. Facts admitted need not be proved
No fact need be proved in any proceeding which the parties to the proceeding or their agents agree to admit at the hearing, or which, before the hearing, they agree to admit by any writing under their hands, or which by any rule of pleading in force at the time they are deemed to have admitted by their pleadings; except that the court may, in its discretion, require the facts admitted to be proved otherwise than by such admissions.Oral evidence
58. Proof of facts by oral evidence
All facts, except the contents of documents, may be proved by oral evidence.59. Oral evidence must be direct
Oral evidence must, in all cases whatever, be direct; that is to say—(a)if it refers to a fact which could be seen, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he or she saw it;(b)if it refers to a fact which could be heard, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he or she heard it;(c)if it refers to a fact which could be perceived by any other sense, or in any other manner, it must be the evidence of a witness who says he or she perceived it by that sense or in that manner;(d)if it refers to an opinion or to the grounds on which that opinion is held, it must be the evidence of the person who holds that opinion on those grounds,except that—(e)the opinions of experts expressed in any treatise commonly offered for sale, and the grounds on which those opinions are held, may be proved by the production of those treatises if the author is dead or cannot be found, or has become incapable of giving evidence, or cannot be called as a witness without an amount of delay or expense which the court regards as unreasonable; and(f)if oral evidence refers to the existence or condition of any material thing other than a document, the court may, if it thinks fit, require the production of that material thing for its inspection.Documentary evidence
60. Proof of contents of documents
The contents of documents may be proved either by primary or by secondary evidence.61. Primary evidence
Primary evidence means the document itself produced for the inspection of the court.Explanation 1 — Where a document is executed in several parts, each part is primary evidence of the document. Where a document is executed in counterpart, each counterpart being executed by one or some of the parties only, each counterpart is primary evidence as against the parties executing it.Explanation 2 — Where a number of documents are all made by one uniform process, as in the case of printing, lithography or photography, each is primary evidence of the contents of the rest; but where they are all copies of a common original, they are not primary evidence of the contents of the original.62. Secondary evidence
Secondary evidence means and includes—63. Proof of documents by primary evidence
Documents must be proved by primary evidence except in the cases hereafter mentioned.64. Cases in which secondary evidence relating to documents may be given
65. Rules as to notice to produce
Secondary evidence of the contents of the documents referred to in section 64(a) shall not be given unless the party proposing to give the secondary evidence has previously given to the party in whose possession or power the document is, or to his or her advocate, such notice to produce it as is prescribed by law, and if no notice is prescribed by law, then such notice as a court considers reasonable in the circumstances of the case; except that such notice shall not be required in order to render secondary evidence admissible in any of the following cases, or in any other case in which the court thinks fit to dispense with it —66. Proof of signature and handwriting of person alleged to have signed or written document produced
If a document is alleged to be signed or to have been written wholly or in part by any person, the signature or the handwriting of so much of the document as is alleged to be in that person’s handwriting must be proved to be in his or her handwriting.67. Proof of execution of document required by law to be attested
If a document is required by law to be attested, it shall not be used as evidence until one attesting witness at least has been called for the purpose of proving its execution, if there is an attesting witness alive, and subject to the process of the court and capable of giving evidence.68. Proof where no attesting witness found
If no such attesting witness can be found, it must be proved that the attestation of one attesting witness at least is in his or her handwriting, and that the signature of the person executing the document is in the handwriting of that person.69. Admission of execution by party to attested document
The admission of a party to an attested document of its execution by himself or herself shall be sufficient proof of its execution as against him or her, though it is a document required by law to be attested.70. Proof when attesting witness denies the execution
If the attesting witness denies or does not recollect the execution of the document, its execution may be proved by other evidence.71. Proof of document not required by law to be attested
An attested document not required by law to be attested may be proved as if it were unattested.72. Comparison of signature, writing or seal with others admitted or proved
Public documents
73. Public documents
The following documents are public documents —74. Private documents
All documents, other than those specified in section 73, are private.75. Certified copies of public documents
Every public officer having the custody of a public document, which any person has a right to inspect, shall give that person on demand a copy of it on payment of the legal fees for the copy, together with a certificate written at the foot of the copy that it is a true copy of that document or part of the document, as the case may be, and the certificate shall be dated and subscribed by the officer with his or her name and official title, and shall be sealed whenever the officer is authorised by law to make use of a seal, and the copies so certified shall be called certified copies.Explanation — Any officer who, by the ordinary course of his or her official duty, is authorised to deliver such copies, shall be deemed to have the custody of those documents within the meaning of this section.76. Proof of documents by production of certified copies
Such certified copies may be produced in proof of the contents of the public documents or parts of the public documents of which they purport to be copies.77. Proof of other official documents
Presumptions as to documents
78. Presumption as to genuineness of certified copies
79. Presumption as to document produced as record of evidence
Whenever a document is produced before any court, purporting to be a record or memorandum of any evidence given in a judicial proceeding or before any officer authorised by law to take evidence, required by law to be reduced to writing, and purporting to be signed by any judge or magistrate, or by any such officer as aforesaid, the court may presume that the document is genuine and that the evidence recorded was the evidence actually given; may take oral evidence of the proceedings and the evidence given; and shall not be precluded from admitting any such document merely by reason of the absence of any formality required by law; provided always that an accused person is not injured as to his or her defence on the merits.80. Presumption as to Gazettes, newspapers, private Acts of Parliament and other documents
The court shall presume the genuineness of every document purporting to be the Gazette, or the Government Gazette of any country of the Commonwealth, or to be a newspaper or journal, or to be a copy of a private Act of Parliament printed by a government printer or in any of the manners mentioned in the Documentary Evidence Act, 1882, of the United Kingdom, and of every document purporting to be a document directed by any law to be kept by any person, if the document is kept substantially in the form required by law and is produced from proper custody.81. Presumption as to document admissible in the U.K. or Ireland without proof of seal or signature
82. Presumption as to maps or plans made by authority of Government
The court shall presume that maps or plans purporting to be made by the authority of the Government were so made and are accurate.83. Presumption as to collections of laws and reports of decisions
The court shall presume the genuineness of every book purporting to be printed or published under the authority of the government of any country, and to contain any of the laws of that country, and of every book purporting to contain reports of decisions of the courts of that country.84. Presumption as to private documents executed outside Uganda
The court shall presume that private documents purporting to be executed out of Uganda were so executed and were duly authenticated if—85. Presumption as to powers of attorney
The court shall presume that every document purporting to be a power of attorney and to have been executed before and authenticated by a notary public, or any court, judge, magistrate, or representative of any government of the Commonwealth, was so executed and authenticated.86. Presumption as to certified copies of foreign judicial records
The court may presume that any document purporting to be a certified copy of any judicial record of any country not forming part of the Commonwealth is genuine and accurate, if the document purports to be certified in any manner which is certified by any representative of any government of the Commonwealth in or for such country to be the manner commonly in use in that country for the certification of copies of judicial records.87. Presumption as to books, maps and charts
The court may presume that any book to which it may refer for information on matters of public or general interest, and that any published map or chart, the statements of which are relevant facts, and which is produced for its inspection, was written and published by the person, and at the time and place, by whom or at which it purports to have been written or published.88. Presumption as to telegraphic messages
The court may presume that a message, forwarded from a telegraph office to the person to whom the message purports to be addressed, corresponds with a message delivered for transmission at the office from which the message purports to be sent; but the court shall not make any presumption as to the person by whom that message was delivered for transmission.89. Presumption as to due execution, etc. of documents not produced
The court shall presume that every document, called for and not produced after notice to produce, was attested, stamped, and executed in the manner required by law.90. Presumption as to documents thirty years old
When any document, purporting or proved to be thirty years old, is produced from any custody which the court in the particular case considers proper, the court may presume that the signature and every other part of that document, which purports to be in the handwriting of any particular person, is in that person’s handwriting and, in the case of a document executed or attested, that it was duly executed and attested by the persons by whom it purports to be executed and attested.Explanation — Documents are said to be in proper custody if they are in the place in which, and under the care of the person with whom, they would naturally be; but no custody is improper if it is proved to have had a legitimate origin, or if the circumstances of the particular case are such as to render such an origin probable. This explanation applies also to section 80.Exclusion of oral by documentary evidence
91. Evidence of terms of contracts, grants and other dispositions of property reduced to form of document
When the terms of a contract or of a grant, or of any other disposition of property, have been reduced to the form of a document, and in all cases in which any matter is required by law to be reduced to the form of a document, no evidence, except as mentioned in section 79, shall be given in proof of the terms of that contract, grant or other disposition of property, or of such matter except the document itself, or secondary evidence of its contents in cases in which secondary evidence is admissible under the provisions hereinbefore contained.Exception 1 — When a public officer is required by law to be appointed in writing, and when it is shown that any particular person has acted as such officer, the writing by which he or she is appointed need not be proved.Exception 2 — Wills admitted to probate in Uganda may be proved by the probate.Explanation 1 — This section applies equally to cases in which the contracts, grants or dispositions of property referred to are contained in one document, and to cases in which they are contained in more documents than one.Explanation 2 — Where there are more originals than one, one original only need be proved.Explanation 3 — The statement, in any document whatever, of a fact other than the facts referred to in this section shall not preclude the admission of oral evidence as to the same fact.92. Exclusion of evidence of oral agreement
When the terms of any such contract, grant or other disposition of property, or any matter required by law to be reduced to the form of a document, have been proved according to section 91, no evidence of any oral agreement or statement shall be admitted, as between the parties to any such instrument or their representatives in interest, for the purpose of contradicting, varying, adding to or subtracting from its terms; but—93. Exclusion of evidence to explain or amend ambiguous document
When the language used in a document is, on its face, ambiguous or defective, evidence may not be given of facts which would show its meaning or supply its defects.94. Exclusion of evidence against application of document to existing facts
When language used in a document is plain in itself, and when it applies accurately to existing facts, evidence may not be given to show that it was not meant to apply to those facts.95. Evidence as to document unmeaning in reference to existing facts
When language used in a document is plain in itself, but is unmeaning in reference to existing facts, evidence may be given to show that it was used in a peculiar sense.96. Evidence as to application of language which can apply to one only of several persons
When the facts are such that the language used might have been meant to apply to any one, and could not have been meant to apply to more than one, of several persons or things, evidence may be given of facts which show which of those persons or things it was intended to apply to.97. Evidence as to application of language to one of two sets of facts, to neither of which the whole correctly applies
When the language used applies partly to one set of existing facts, and partly to another set of existing facts, but the whole of it does not apply correctly to either, evidence may be given to show to which of the two it was meant to apply.98. Evidence as to meaning of illegible characters, etc.
Evidence may be given to show the meaning of illegible or not commonly intelligible characters, of foreign, obsolete, technical, local and provincial expressions, of abbreviations and of words used in a peculiar sense.99. Who may give evidence of agreement varying terms of document
Persons who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest, may give evidence of any facts tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document.100. Saving of provisions of Succession Act relating to wills
Nothing in sections 91 to 99 shall be taken to affect any of the provisions of the Succession Act as to the construction of wills.Part IV – Production and effect of evidence
Burden of proof
101. Burden of proof
102. On whom burden of proof lies
The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on that person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side.103. Burden of proof as to particular fact
The burden of proof as to any particular fact lies on that person who wishes the court to believe in its existence, unless it is provided by any law that the proof of that fact shall lie on any particular person.104. Burden of proving fact to be proved to make evidence admissible
The burden of proving any fact necessary to be proved in order to enable any person to give evidence of any other fact is on the person who wishes to give that evidence.105. Burden of proving that case of accused comes within exceptions and fact especially within knowledge
106. Burden of proving, in civil proceedings, fact especially within knowledge
In civil proceedings, when any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon that person.107. Burden of proving death of person known to have been alive within thirty years
When the question is whether a person is alive or dead, and it is shown that he or she was alive within thirty years, the burden of proving that he or she is dead is on the person who affirms it.108. Burden of proving that person is alive who has not been heard of for seven years
When the question is whether a person is alive or dead, and it is proved that he or she has not been heard of for seven years by those who would naturally have heard of him or her if he or she had been alive, the burden of proving that he or she is alive is shifted to the person who affirms it.109. Burden of proof as to relationship in the cases of partners, landlord and tenant, principal and agent
When the question is whether persons are partners, landlord and tenant, or principal and agent, and it has been shown that they have been acting as such, the burden of proving that they do not stand or have ceased to stand, to each other in those relationships respectively, is on the person who affirms it.110. Burden of proof as to ownership
When the question is whether any person is owner of anything of which he or she is shown to be in possession, the burden of proving that he or she is not the owner is on the person who affirms that he or she is not the owner.111. Proof of good faith in transactions where one party is in relation of active confidence
Where there is a question as to the good faith of a transaction between parties, one of whom stands to the other in a position of active confidence, the burden of proving the good faith of the transaction is on the party who is in a position of active confidence.112. Birth during marriage conclusive proof of legitimacy
The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when he could have been begotten.113. Court may presume existence of certain facts
The court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case.Estoppel
114. Estoppel
When one person has, by his or her declaration, act or omission, intentionally caused or permitted another person to believe a thing to be true and to act upon that belief, neither he or she nor his or her representative shall be allowed, in any suit or proceeding between himself or herself and that person or his or her representative, to deny the truth of that thing.115. Estoppel of tenant or of licensee of person in possession
No tenant of immovable property, or person claiming through that tenant, shall, during the continuance of the tenancy, be permitted to deny that the landlord of that tenant had, at the beginning of the tenancy, a title to that immovable property; and no person who came upon any immovable property by the licence of the person in possession of that property shall during the continuance of the licence be permitted to deny that that person had a title to such possession at the time when the licence was given.116. Estoppel of acceptor of bill of exchange, bailee or licensee
No acceptor of a bill of exchange shall be permitted to deny that the drawer had authority to draw the bill or to endorse it; nor shall any bailee or licensee be permitted to deny that his or her bailor or licensor had, at the time when the bailment or licence commenced, authority to make the bailment or grant the licence.Explanation 1 — The acceptor of a bill of exchange may deny that the bill was really drawn by the person by whom it purports to have been drawn.Explanation 2 — If a bailee delivers the goods bailed to a person other than the bailor, he or she may prove that that person had a right to them as against the bailor.Witnesses
117. Who may testify
All persons shall be competent to testify unless the court considers that they are prevented from understanding the questions put to them, or from giving rational answers to those questions, by tender years, extreme old age, disease, whether of body or mind, or any other cause of the same kind.Explanation — A lunatic is not incompetent to testify, unless he or she is prevented by his or her lunacy from understanding the questions put to him or her and giving rational answers to them.118. Dumb witnesses
A witness who is unable to speak may give his or her evidence in any other manner in which he or she can make it intelligible, as by writing or by signs; but the writing must be written and the signs made in open court. Evidence so given shall be deemed to be oral evidence.119. Judge and magistrate
No judge or magistrate shall, except upon the special order of some court to which he or she is subordinate, be compelled to answer any questions as to his or her own conduct in court as such judge or magistrate, or as to anything which came to his or her knowledge in court as such judge or magistrate; but he or she may be examined as to other matters which occurred in his or her presence while he or she was so acting.120. Evidence of spouses in criminal proceedings
121. General competency of parties and their husbands and wives in civil proceedings
In all civil proceedings, the parties to the suit, and the husband and wife of any party to the suit, shall be competent and compellable witnesses.122. Evidence as to affairs of State
No one shall be permitted to give any evidence derived from unpublished official records relating to any affairs of State, except with the permission of the officer at the head of the department concerned, who shall give or withhold that permission as he or she thinks fit.123. Official communications
No public officer shall be compelled to disclose communications made to him or her in the course of his or her duty, when he or she considers that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure.124. Information as to commission of offences
No magistrate or police officer shall be compelled to say from where he or she got any information as to the commission of any offence, and no revenue officer shall be compelled to say from where he or she got any information as to the commission of any offence against the public revenues.Explanation — “Revenue officer” in this section means any officer employed in or about the business of any branch of the public revenue.125. Professional communications
No advocate shall at any time be permitted, unless with his or her client’s express consent, to disclose any communication made to him or her in the course and for the purpose of his or her employment as an advocate by or on behalf of his or her client, or to state the contents or condition of any document with which he or she has become acquainted in the course and for the purpose of his or her professional employment, or to disclose any advice given by him or her to his or her client in the course and for the purpose of that employment; but nothing in this section shall protect from disclosure—126. Section 125 to apply to interpreters, etc.
Section 125 shall apply to interpreters, and the clerks or servants of advocates.127. Privilege not waived by volunteering evidence
If any party to a suit gives evidence in the suit at his or her own instance or otherwise, he or she shall not be deemed to have consented thereby to such disclosure as is mentioned in section 125; and, if any party to a suit or proceeding calls any such advocate as a witness, he or she shall be deemed to have consented to such disclosure only if he or she questions the advocate on matters which, but for that question, he or she would not be at liberty to disclose.128. Confidential communications with legal advisers
No one shall be compelled to disclose to the court any confidential communication which has taken place between him or her and his or her legal professional adviser, unless he or she offers himself or herself as a witness, in which case he or she may be compelled to disclose any such communications as may appear to the court necessary to be known in order to explain any evidence which he or she has given, but no other.129. Production of title deeds of witness not a party
No witness who is not a party to a suit shall be compelled to produce his or her title deeds to any property or any document in virtue of which he or she holds any property as pledgee or mortgagee, or any document the production of which might tend to incriminate him or her, unless he or she has agreed in writing to produce them with the person seeking the production of such deeds or some person through whom he or she claims.130. Production of documents which another person having possession could refuse to produce
No one shall be compelled to produce documents in his or her possession, which any other person would be entitled to refuse to produce if they were in his or her possession, unless the last-mentioned person consents to their production.131. Witness not excused from answering on ground that answer will incriminate
A witness shall not be excused from answering any question as to any matter relevant to the matter in issue in any suit or in any civil or criminal proceeding, upon the ground that the answer to the question will incriminate, or may tend directly or indirectly to incriminate, the witness, or that it will expose, or tend directly or indirectly to expose, the witness to a penalty or forfeiture of any kind, or that it may establish or tend to establish that he or she owes a debt or is otherwise subject to a civil suit; but no such answer, which a witness shall be compelled to give, shall subject him or her to any arrest or prosecution, or be proved against him or her in any subsequent criminal proceeding, except a prosecution for giving false evidence by that answer.Explanation — A person who is charged with an offence who applies to be called as a witness shall not be excused from answering any question that may tend to incriminate him or her as to the offence charged.132. Accomplice
An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person; and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice.133. Number of witnesses
Subject to the provisions of any other law in force, no particular number of witnesses shall in any case be required for the proof of any fact.Examination of witnesses
134. Order of production and examination of witnesses
The order in which witnesses are produced and examined shall be regulated by the law and practice for the time being relating to civil and criminal procedure respectively, and, in the absence of any such law, by the discretion of the court.135. Judge to decide as to admissibility of evidence
136. Examination-in-chief; cross-examination; reexamination
137. Order of examinations
138. Cross-examination of person called to produce a document
A person summoned to produce a document does not become a witness by the mere fact that he or she produces it, and cannot be cross-examined unless he or she is called as a witness.139. Witnesses to character
Witnesses to character may be cross-examined and reexamined.140. Leading questions
Any question suggesting the answer which the person putting it wishes or expects to receive is called a leading question.141. When leading questions must not be asked
142. When leading questions may be asked
Leading questions may be asked in cross-examination.143. Evidence as to matters in writing
Any witness may be asked, while under examination, whether any contract, grant or other disposition of property, as to which he or she is giving evidence, was not contained in a document; and if he or she says that it was, or if he or she is about to make any statement as to the contents of any document, which, in the opinion of the court, ought to be produced, the adverse party may object to that evidence being given until the document is produced, or until facts have been proved which entitle the party who called the witness to give secondary evidence of it.Explanation — A witness may give oral evidence of statements made by other persons about the contents of documents if the statements are in themselves relevant facts.144. Cross-examination as to previous statements in writing
A witness may be cross-examined as to previous statements made by him or her in writing or reduced into writing, and relevant to matters in question, without the writing being shown to him or her, or being proved; but if it is intended to contradict the witness by the writing, his or her attention must, before the writing can be proved, be called to those parts of it which are to be used for the purpose of contradicting him or her.145. Questions lawful in cross-examination
When a witness is cross-examined, he or she may, in addition to the questions hereinbefore referred to, be asked any questions which tend—146. When witness to be compelled to answer
If any such question relates to a matter relevant to the suit or proceeding, section 131 shall apply to the question.147. Court to decide when questions shall be asked and when witness compelled to answer
148. Questions not to be asked without reasonable grounds
No such question as is referred to in section 147 ought to be asked, unless the person asking it has reasonable grounds for thinking that the imputation which it conveys is well-founded.149. Procedure of court in case of question being asked without reasonable grounds
If the court is of opinion that any such question was asked without reasonable grounds, it may, if it was asked by any advocate, report the circumstances of the case to the High Court or other authority to which the advocate is subject in the exercise of his or her profession.150. Indecent and scandalous questions
The court may forbid any question or inquiries which it regards as indecent or scandalous, although the questions or inquiries may have some bearing on the questions before the court, unless they relate to facts in issue, or to matters necessary to be known in order to determine whether or not the facts in issue existed.151. Questions intended to insult or annoy
The court shall forbid any question which appears to it to be intended to insult or annoy, or which, though proper in itself, appears to the court needlessly offensive in form.152. Exclusion of evidence to contradict answers to questions testing veracity
When a witness has been asked and has answered any question which is relevant to the inquiry only insofar as it tends to shake his or her credit by injuring his or her character, no evidence shall be given to contradict him or her; but if he or she answers falsely, he or she may afterwards be charged with giving false evidence.Exception 1 — If a witness is asked whether he or she has been previously convicted of any crime, and denies it, evidence may be given of his or her previous conviction.Exception 2 — If a witness is asked any question tending to impeach his or her impartiality and answers it by denying the facts suggested, he or she may be contradicted.153. Question by party to his own witness
The court may, in its discretion, permit the person who calls a witness to put any question to him or her which might be put in cross-examination by the adverse party.154. Impeaching credit of witness
The credit of a witness may be impeached in the following ways by the adverse party, or with the consent of the court, by the party who calls him or her—155. Evidence tending to corroborate evidence of relevant fact admissible
When a witness whom it is intended to corroborate gives evidence of any relevant fact, he or she may be questioned as to any other circumstances which he or she observed at or near to the time or place at which the relevant fact occurred, if the court is of opinion that the circumstances, if proved, would corroborate the testimony of the witness as to the relevant fact which he or she testifies.156. Former statements of witness may be proved to corroborate later testimony as to same fact
In order to corroborate the testimony of a witness, any former statement made by the witness relating to the same fact, at or about the time when the fact took place, or before any authority legally competent to investigate the fact, may be proved.157. What matters may be proved in connection with proved statement relevant under section 30 or 31
Whenever any statement, relevant under section 30 or 31, is proved, all matters may be proved either in order to contradict or to corroborate it, or in order to impeach or confirm the credit of the person by whom it was made, which might have been proved if that person had been called as a witness and had denied upon cross-examination the truth of the matter suggested.158. Refreshing memory; when witness may use copy of document to refresh memory
159. Testimony to facts stated in document mentioned in section 158
A witness may also testify to facts mentioned in any such document as is mentioned in section 158, although he or she has no specific recollection of the facts themselves, if he or she is sure that the facts were correctly recorded in the document.160. Right of adverse party as to writing used to refresh memory
Subject to the Criminal Procedure Code Act or any other law to the contrary, any writing referred to under sections 158 or 159 must be produced and shown to the adverse party if he or she requires it; that party may, if he or she pleases, cross-examine the witness on the writing.161. Production and translation of documents
162. Giving as evidence document called for and produced on notice
When a party calls for a document which he or she has given the other party notice to produce, and the document is produced and inspected by the party calling for its production, he or she is bound to give it as evidence if the party producing it requires him or her to do so.163. Using as evidence document production of which was refused on notice
When a party refuses to produce a document which he or she has had notice to produce, he or she cannot afterwards use the document as evidence without the consent of the other party or the order of the court.164. Judge’s power to put questions or order production
The judge may, in order to discover or to obtain proper proof of relevant facts, ask any question he or she pleases, in any form, at any time, of any witness, or of the parties about any fact relevant or irrelevant; and may order the production of any document or thing; and neither the parties nor their agents shall be entitled to make any objection to any such question or order, nor, without the leave of the court, to cross-examine any witness upon any answer given in reply to any such question; but—165. Power of assessors to put questions
In cases tried with assessors, the assessors may put any questions to the witness, through or by leave of the judge, which the judge himself or herself might put and which he or she considers proper.166. No new trial for improper admission or rejection of evidence
The improper admission or rejection of evidence shall not be ground of itself for a new trial, or reversal of any decision in any case, if it shall appear to the court before which the objection is raised that, independently of the evidence objected to and admitted, there was sufficient evidence to justify the decision, or that, if the rejected evidence had been received, it ought not to have varied the decision.History of this document
31 December 2000 this version
Consolidation
01 August 1909
Commenced