The Evidence Act

This Act may be cited as the Evidence Act.

This Act applies to judicial proceedings in all courts except primary courts where evidence is or may be given, and it does not apply to affidavits or arbitration proceedings.

This provision defines key terms used in the Act, including confession, court, document, evidence, fact, fact in issue, husband or wife, oral evidence, police officer, and relevant.

If this Act or another written law says the court may presume a fact, the court may treat that fact as proved unless disproved, or ask for proof.

If the law says the court must presume a fact, the court must treat it as proved unless it is disproved.

If a fact is declared conclusive proof of another fact, the court must treat the other fact as proved and must not allow evidence to disprove it.

Evidence may be given to prove facts in issue and other relevant facts, except where another law provides otherwise.

Facts connected to a fact in issue as part of the same transaction are relevant, even if they happened at different times or places.

The provision says certain facts are relevant, including facts that are the occasion, cause, effect, or surrounding state of things, and evidence of motive, preparation, or later conduct.

Facts showing motive, preparation, or relevant conduct may be relevant evidence; statements are generally not part of “conduct” unless they accompany and explain acts.

Facts are relevant if they are needed to explain or introduce another fact, support or rebut an inference, identify a person or thing, fix the time or place of a fact, or show the relationship between parties.

If there are reasonable grounds to believe two or more people conspired to commit an offence or actionable wrong, statements, acts, or writings by one person in furtherance of the common intention can be used as relevant evidence against each conspirator.

Facts that are otherwise irrelevant become relevant if they conflict with a fact in issue or relevant fact, or if they make a fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or improbable.

In suits for damages, facts that help the court work out the amount of damages are relevant.

When the existence of a right or custom is disputed, certain transactions and instances are relevant facts.

Facts showing a person’s state of mind or bodily condition are relevant when that state is in issue or relevant.

If there is a question about whether an act was accidental or intentional, evidence that it was part of a series of similar occurrences may be relevant.

If there is a question about whether an act was done, evidence of the usual course of business is relevant.

This section defines an admission as a statement made in oral, electronic, or documentary form that can suggest an inference about a fact in issue or a relevant fact.

This section says which statements count as admissions in court, including statements by a party or authorised agent, and limits when statements by representatives or interested persons count.

Statements can count as admissions when they are made by a person whose position or liability must be proved, are relevant to that position or liability, and are made while the person still holds that position or liability.

Statements made by people a party to the suit expressly refers for information, about a matter in dispute, count as admissions.

Admissions can be used against the person who made them, but generally cannot be used by that person or their representative except in listed cases.

Oral admissions about a document’s contents are not relevant unless the party can use secondary evidence or the document’s genuineness is in question.

In civil cases, an admission is not relevant if it was made on an express condition that it would not be used as evidence, or where the court can infer the parties agreed it would not be given in evidence.

Admissions are not final proof of what was admitted, but they may still work as estoppel under this Act.

Oral evidence may be used to prove facts, but not the contents of documents, and it must be direct.

Oral evidence must be direct. In some cases, expert opinions in commonly sold treatises may be proved by producing the treatise, and a court may require a material thing to be produced for inspection.

This section stops certain people from denying facts they previously accepted or relied on, with specific rules for tenants, licensees, acceptors of bills of exchange, bailees, and licensees.

The order for producing and examining witnesses is controlled by the relevant civil or criminal procedure law and practice; if there is no such law, the court decides.

The court decides whether evidence is admissible based on relevance.

This section defines examination-in-chief, cross-examination, and re-examination of a witness.

Witnesses are to be examined in a set order: examination-in-chief, then cross-examination if requested, then re-examination if requested. The court can also allow a witness to be recalled or delay examination.

A confession may be used against the accused if it was made voluntarily; the prosecution must prove voluntariness.

A voluntary confession made in front of a magistrate or justice of the peace may be used against the accused, and a confession should not be rejected just because of a promise or threat unless the court thinks the inducement was likely to cause a false admission of guilt.

A confession is relevant and need not be rejected if it was made after an inducement’s effect had fully worn off, in the court’s opinion.

Information from an accused person in custody can be relevant if it directly relates to a fact discovered from that information.

A confession that is otherwise relevant remains relevant even if it was made under secrecy, after deception, while drunk, in answer to questions the person need not have answered, or without a warning that it need not be made.

In joint trials, the court may consider one accused person’s confession against another, but a conviction cannot rest only on a co-accused’s confession.

The contents of a document may be proved by primary evidence or by secondary evidence.

This provision explains when a document, a part of a document, a counterpart, or a uniformly produced copy counts as primary evidence.

A person summoned to produce a document does not become a witness just because they produce it, and they cannot be cross-examined unless and until they are called as a witness.

Witnesses to character may be cross-examined.

A leading question is a question that suggests the answer the questioner wants or expects.

The court must allow leading questions for introductory, undisputed, or already sufficiently proved matters.

Leading questions may be asked during cross-examination.

A witness under examination may be asked whether a matter in issue was not in a document, and the adverse party may object until the document is produced or secondary evidence is justified.

A witness can be cross-examined about prior written statements relevant to the issues, even if the writing is not shown or proved first.

In cross-examination, a witness may be asked questions that test truthfulness, identify who the witness is, or challenge the witness’s credibility, even if the answers could incriminate the witness or expose the witness to a penalty or forfeiture.

If a question under section 155 is relevant to the suit or proceeding, section 141 applies.

A person charged with an offence who testifies for the defence may be cross-examined on any question, even if the answer could incriminate them.

The court decides whether a witness must answer an irrelevant question, may warn the witness not to answer, may draw an adverse inference from refusal, and such questions may not be asked unless the asker has reasonable grounds to think the imputation is well founded.

The court may forbid questions or inquiries it considers indecent or scandalous, unless they relate to facts in issue or are necessary to decide whether those facts exist.

The court must forbid questions that appear intended to insult or annoy, or that are needlessly offensive in form.

A witness generally cannot be contradicted on answers used only to test character, but there are exceptions for previous convictions and questions about impartiality.

The court may allow a party who calls a witness to ask that witness questions that would otherwise be asked in cross-examination.

This section says a witness’s credibility may be attacked in specified ways, and limits how a witness may explain why another witness is unworthy of credit.

Certain statements from unavailable persons can be admitted as evidence in specific listed cases.

Certain written statements in criminal proceedings may be admitted as evidence if they relate to a relevant fact and meet the listed record or business-record conditions.

Written or electronic statements can be used as evidence in criminal proceedings if section 34B’s conditions are met.

In civil proceedings, certain written statements can be admitted as evidence instead of calling the witness, subject to conditions and the court’s discretion.

This section defines key terms used in the Part, including “bank” or “banker,” “banker’s books,” “court,” and “legal proceedings.”

A copy of an entry in a banker’s book must be accepted in legal proceedings as prima facie evidence of the entry and the matters, transactions, and accounts recorded in it, subject to the Act.

A copy of an entry in a banker’s book is not admissible unless the required proof is first provided.

A bank-book printout can be received in evidence if it is accurately produced and supported by proof that it was made in the ordinary course of business and that the book is in the bank’s custody.

A copy of a banker’s book entry cannot be received in evidence unless it is proved correct by comparison with the original entry.

A banker or bank officer generally cannot be forced in unrelated legal proceedings to produce banker’s books or testify about their contents, unless a court orders it for special cause.

A court may let a party to legal proceedings inspect and copy entries in a banker’s book for the case.

The court controls costs for applications and court orders, and may require the bank to pay costs caused by the bank’s default or delay.

A witness may refresh memory while being examined by referring to certain writings.

A witness may use a copy of a writing to refresh memory if the court allows it and is satisfied there is a good reason the original is not produced.

An expert may use professional treatises to refresh memory.

A witness may testify about facts mentioned in a document referred to in sections 168 or 169, even without specific recollection, if sure the document recorded the facts correctly.

An adverse party may choose to cross-examine a witness on a writing used to refresh memory, if that party wants to.

A witness told to produce a document must bring it to court if it is in their possession or power, even if there is an objection; the court decides those objections.

If a document is called for after notice to produce and is inspected, the other party must give it as evidence when the producing party requires it.

If a party refuses to produce a document after being notified to produce it, the party may not later use that document as evidence unless the other party consents or the court orders it.

The court may ask questions and order production of documents or things to discover or prove relevant facts, but the parties and their agents cannot object or cross-examine without the court’s leave.

Witness evidence from an earlier judicial proceeding can be used to prove the facts stated in later proceedings, or later in the same proceeding, if specific conditions are met.

Regularly kept book entries can be relevant as evidence, but they do not by themselves prove liability.

An entry in an official book, register, or record that states a fact in issue or a relevant fact is itself a relevant fact if made by a public servant in the course of official duty or by a person performing a duty required by law.

Certain facts stated in published maps, charts, or government-authorized maps and plans are treated as relevant facts.

For a court deciding whether a public fact exists, statements in a recital in an Act, a duly promulgated law of the United Republic, or a Government Gazette notification are relevant facts.

A court may treat certain book statements and foreign court reports as relevant when it needs to decide on a country’s law.

In criminal proceedings, certain electronic, surveillance, and audio/video records may be admitted as evidence.

This provision says which documents count as public documents.

Documents other than public documents are private.

Public officers with custody of a public document must, on demand and payment of legal fees, give a copy and a certificate that it is a true copy.

Certified copies of public documents may be used as proof of the contents of the documents, or the parts they copy.

This section lists types of public documents and the ways they may be proved as official documents.

In cases tried with assessors, assessors may ask the witness proper questions through or with leave of the court.

In these cases, only the amount of the statement or related material that the court thinks is necessary may be used, and no more.

A judgment, order, or decree that prevents a court from hearing a suit or trial is a relevant fact when deciding whether the court should hear the suit or hold the trial.

Final judgments, orders, or decrees from a competent court can be relevant and may conclusively prove certain legal statuses or property ownership when those matters are relevant.

A final court judgment in a criminal case becomes conclusive evidence after the appeal period ends, or after the appeal is decided, whichever happens later.

Judgements, orders, or decrees (other than those in section 43) are relevant if they concern public matters relevant to the inquiry, but they are not conclusive proof of what they say.

Judgements, orders, and decrees are generally irrelevant, except those covered by sections 42 to 44 or where their existence is directly in issue or made relevant by another provision of the Act.

A party in a suit or other proceedings may challenge a relevant judgment, order, or decree by showing it was made by an incompetent court or obtained by fraud or collusion.

This section says documentary evidence is generally required for written contracts, grants, dispositions of property, and other matters that must be in writing, with some exceptions.

Evidence of an oral agreement cannot be admitted to contradict or change a written instrument, but several oral-evidence exceptions are allowed.

If a document’s language is ambiguous or defective on its face, evidence may not be given to explain its meaning or fix the defect.

If a document’s language is plain and fits the existing facts, evidence cannot be used to show it was not meant to apply.

Evidence may be used to show that words in a document were used in a peculiar sense when the language is plain but does not make sense in relation to the existing facts.

Evidence may be given to show which person or thing a term was intended to apply to when the language could refer to only one of several possible persons or things.

Evidence may be used when a document’s language partly fits two different sets of existing facts but fits neither of them fully.

Evidence may be given to explain the meaning of hard-to-read, uncommon, obsolete, abbreviated, or specially used words or expressions.

People who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest, may give evidence about facts showing a contemporaneous agreement that varies the document’s terms.

This Part does not change any other written law about how wills or other testamentary dispositions are construed.

When a court must decide on foreign law, science or art, or on identifying handwriting, fingerprints, or other impressions, expert opinions on those points count as relevant facts.

Facts that would not otherwise be relevant are relevant if they support or conflict with relevant expert opinions.

A court may treat the opinion of a person familiar with someone’s handwriting as relevant evidence about who wrote or signed a document.

If a court must decide whether a general custom or right exists, it may treat the opinions of people likely to know about it as relevant evidence.

In certain cases, opinions from people with special knowledge are treated as relevant facts for the court.

A court may treat a family member’s or other knowledgeable person’s opinion, shown by conduct, as relevant evidence about a relationship.

If a living person’s opinion is relevant, the grounds for that opinion are also relevant.

In civil cases, character evidence is generally irrelevant, except when it comes from otherwise relevant facts.

In criminal proceedings, an accused person’s good character is relevant.

In criminal proceedings, a charged witness generally cannot be asked or made to answer questions about other offences or bad character, unless one of the stated exceptions applies.

“Character” includes reputation and disposition; evidence is limited to general reputation and general disposition, and facts judicially noticed do not need to be proved.

Courts must take judicial notice of specified facts, may use reference books in certain matters, and may require supporting documents before doing so; in civil proceedings, admitted facts generally need not be proved.

A person who asks a court to decide a legal right or liability based on asserted facts must prove those facts.

In a suit proceeding, the burden of proof is on the person who would lose if no evidence were given by either side.

A person who wants the court to believe a particular fact must prove it, unless the law says another person must prove it.

A person who wants to give evidence must prove any fact needed to make that evidence admissible for another fact.

An accused person generally must prove any exception, exemption, qualification, or facts especially within their knowledge, but may be acquitted if the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt.

In civil proceedings, a person must prove a fact that is especially within that person's knowledge.

If a person claims a man is dead, that person must prove it when the man was shown to be alive within the previous thirty years.

If a man has not been heard of for five years by people who would naturally have heard from him, the person claiming he is alive must prove it.

Sections 116 and 117 do not apply to proceedings under the Law of Marriage Act.

If people have been acting as partners, landlord and tenant, or principal and agent, the person claiming those relationships do not exist or have ended must prove that.

If a person in possession of something is questioned about ownership, the person claiming they are not the owner must prove it.

If there is a question about whether a transaction was made in good faith, the party in the position of active confidence must prove the transaction was in good faith.

A child born during a valid marriage, or within 280 days after it ends while the mother remains unmarried, is presumed to be the husband’s legitimate son or daughter, but that presumption can be rebutted.

A court may infer a fact if it thinks the fact likely happened.

Most people are competent to testify, but the court can exclude someone who cannot understand questions or give rational answers for reasons like tender age, extreme old age, disease, or similar causes.

A witness who cannot speak may give evidence by other intelligible means, such as writing or signs, but the writing or signs must be made in open court.

This section sets out when a spouse can give evidence in a prosecution, when they must be warned before testifying, and when their evidence is or is not admissible.

In civil proceedings, the parties and a party’s husband, wife, or wives can be called as witnesses.

A Minister may state on oath that a document in unpublished official records should be withheld from production because disclosure would harm the public interest; if so, the document or a copy is not admissible.

Judges, magistrates, police officers, and revenue officers cannot be compelled to reveal the source of information about an offence.

Advocates generally may not disclose client communications, related documents, or advice without the client’s express consent.

Section 134 applies to interpreters and to the clerks or servants of advocates.

A party who gives evidence in a suit is not treated as consenting to the disclosure mentioned in the section.

The text limits when a court can require disclosure or production of privileged communications and certain documents.

A witness must answer relevant questions in civil or criminal proceedings even if the answer could incriminate them or expose them to a penalty, forfeiture, or debt claims.

In a receiving case, evidence about recent possession or a recent conviction for fraud or dishonesty may be used to prove guilty knowledge, but the conviction evidence is restricted by notice and possession requirements.

An accomplice may give evidence against an accused person, and a conviction is not invalid just because it rests on uncorroborated accomplice testimony.

No fixed number of witnesses is required to prove a fact, subject to any other written law.

Electronic evidence is admissible in proceedings, and its admissibility and weight are handled under section 18 of the Electronic Transaction Act.

This section lists what counts as secondary evidence.

Documents must be proved by primary evidence unless this Act provides otherwise.

Section 67 lists when secondary evidence of a document may be used instead of the original.

Secondary evidence may not be given unless the party first gives notice to produce the document, unless one of the listed exceptions applies.

If a document is said to be signed or handwritten by a person, the relevant signature or handwriting must be proved to be that person’s handwriting.

An attested document cannot be used as evidence until an attesting witness has been called to prove its execution, if such a witness is alive and able to give evidence.

If no attesting witness can be found, or the witness cannot be compelled by the court, or cannot give evidence, proof is required of two handwriting facts.

A party’s admission that it executed an attested document is enough proof against that party, even if the document is one that the law requires to be attested.

If the attesting witness denies or does not remember signing or executing the document, execution may be proved by other evidence.

An attested document that the law does not require to be attested may be proved as if it were unattested.

The court may compare disputed signatures, writings, seals, words, figures, and finger impressions with admitted or proved examples.

A court must treat certain certified or officially admissible documents as genuine, and must also presume the signing officer held the official position claimed.

The court must presume certain evidence documents are genuine and that the related statements and taking of the evidence are true, if the document appears to be a signed record or memorandum of witness evidence.

A court must presume certain documents are genuine if they are kept in the required form and come from proper custody.

A court must presume government-made maps or plans are genuine and accurate, and maps or plans made for legal proceedings must be proved accurate.

A court must presume genuine certain foreign law books and court report books that appear to be officially published or contain laws or decisions.

A court must presume a private document executed outside the United Republic was properly executed and authenticated if the section’s stated conditions are met.

A court must presume that a document that appears to be a power of attorney was properly executed and authenticated if it was authenticated by the listed officials or officers.

A court may presume a certified copy of a foreign judicial record is genuine and accurate if the certification is in a manner certified as commonly used in that country.

A court may presume that certain books, maps, or charts were written and published by the person, time, and place they appear to have been.

A court may presume a forwarded message matches the one delivered for transmission, but it must not presume who delivered it for transmission.

The court must presume that a document called for but not produced after notice to produce was properly attested, stamped, and executed.

A court may presume certain facts about a document that is less than 20 years old if it comes from custody the court considers proper.

A witness may be questioned about other circumstances they observed near the time or place of the relevant fact, if the court thinks those circumstances would corroborate the witness’s testimony.

A witness’s earlier written or spoken statement may be proved to support the witness’s testimony.

If a statement relevant under section 34 or 35 is proved, other matters may also be proved for contradiction, corroboration, or to test the maker’s credibility.

Improper admission or rejection of evidence, by itself, is not enough to justify a new trial or reversal if the court finds the decision was otherwise supported.

This section says the Act does not override other written laws on evidence, unless the Act expressly says otherwise.

This section is titled “Repeal and saving of laws.”