WHAT IS RELEVANCY OF FACTS
As per the sec. 2 of the Indian Evidence Act [I.E, A], one fact is said to be relevant to another when one is connected with the other in any of the ways referred to in the provision of I.E.Act relating to relevancy of facts.
I.E. Act does not give any specific definition which defines the relevancy and relevant fact. According to I.E. Act, all the facts relevant to another will be considered as a relevant fact. On the other hand According to I.E.Act all fact which will fall under the category of Section. 5 to 55 of I.E.Act will be called the relevant fact that means section 5 to 55 of I.E.Act provides the several ways in which one fact is connected with another fact and that facts are known as a relevant fact. Relevancy refers to the degree of connection and probative value between a fact that is given in evidence and an issue to be proved.
ILLUSTRATION:- A is tried for the murder of B by beating him with a club with the intention of causing his death. This example includes three facts in issue:-
- A’s beating B with the club
- A’s causing B’s death by the beating
- A’s intention to cause B’s death.
Now in this example, the fact which shows that there was the quarrel between A and B before the murder of B will be the relevant fact to prove the third fact in issue i.e A had the intention to cause the death of B.
ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTS OF RELEVANCY
- Relevancy is not dependent on the law.on the other hand it is not mandatory the relevant fact must be relevant under law.
- Relevancy is determined on the basis of practical experience, logic, common sense, basic knowledge and human experience of the conduct.
The question of relevancy is a question of law to be decided by the judge. But there can be a situation that when there can be evidence partly relevant and partly irrelevant. In that situation if the relevant evidence is able to separate from irrelevant evidence then relevant evidence will be admissible in the court and irrelevant will be rejected.
LOGICAL AND LEGAL RELEVANCY
Relevancy may be of two kinds:-
Logical relevancy means the relevancy of facts which are not defined under the sec. 5to55 of I.E.Act. but all the relevancy of fact which has been described under the sec. 5 to 55 of I.E.Act will be considered as the legal relevancy.
WHAT IS ADMISSIBILITY
Admissibility defines the process whereby the court determines whether the law of evidence permits that relevant fact will be admissible in the court. All the facts which are admissible by the court are called admissibility.
Sec. 136 of I.E.Act states that judge to decide the admissibility of evidence. It also states that it only depends upon the judge to admit the irrelevant fact and reject the relevant fact. On the other hand according to this sec. the judge can also admit the relevant fact and reject the irrelevant in the relevancy of facts that means it depends upon the judge to admit the fact which is relevant to prove the third fact in issue that is A’s intention to cause B’s death.
ARE ALL THE RELEVANT FACTS ADMISSIBLE IN THE COURT?
All the relevant facts may not be admissible in court and vice-versa. Thus, the fact which is admissible in court will be relevant but all the relevant fact is not necessarily admissible. Relevancy is the genus of which admissibility is a species. All the legal relevancy is admissible in the court but all logical relevancy needs not to be admissible in the court. For example, the hearsay evidence is the relevant fact but hearsay evidence is not directly admissible in the court.
Relevancy depends upon the logic but admissibility is only based upon the law. The question of relevancy has been dealt with under section 5 to 55 of I.E.Act and that of admissibility under section 56 and onwards.
The admissibility is the means and method by which the relevant fact is proved. The relevancy and admissibility are not co-extensive and synonymous. The rule of relevancy declares that certain facts relevant, rules of admissibility declares as to whether certain evidence about relevnt fact may be admitted or rejected by the court.
This concept will be clear by this case RAM BIHARI YADAV V. STATE OF BIHAR[1] in this case supreme court held that fact which is relevant may not be admissible in court. For example, the communication between the spouses during the marriage, the communication between an advocate and his client are relevant but are not admissible because of the privileged communication. The fact which is admissible may not be relevant. For example, the question permitted to be cross-examined to test the veracity of witness though not relevant but are admissible.
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN RELEVANCY AND ADMISSIBILITY
| RELEVANCY | ADMISSIBILITY |
| Relevancy is based on logic. | Admissibility is not based on the logic it is based on the strict rules of law. |
| The rules of relevancy described under the sewc. 5 to 55 of I.E.Act, 1872. | The rule of admissibility is not described under sec. 5 to 55 of I.E.Act, 1872 but in sec. 56 or onwards. |
| The rule of relevancy declares what is relevant to be proved. | The rule of admissibility means that court can permit the evidence to be given of a fact only if it is relevant. |
CONCLUSION
Relevancy of facts means the fact which is relevant to prove the other fact. The relevancy of fact defined under sec. 5 to 55 of I.E.Act.All the fact which will fall under the sec. 5 to 55 of I.E.Act will be a relevant fact.
All the relevant facts may not be admissible in the court but the fact which is admissible in court is the relevant fact. For ex. All the privileged communication may not be admissible in the court although this fact may be relevant to the fact in issue.
[1] AIR 1998 SC 1850
This Article is Authored by Madhu Vashishtha, 3rd Year and B.A. LL.B, Student of JEMTEC school of law, Greater noida/ GGSIPU.
Also Read – Under What Circumstances Secondary Evidence Is Admissible?
