Improper admission and rejection of evidence

A trial court in Pune lets in a document it should have kept out. The accused is convicted and appeals, saying the whole trial is tainted. Does the conviction fall? Or a Judge refuses to look at a letter that ought to have been admitted, and the losing party asks for a fresh trial. Judges make mistakes about evidence, and no appeal system could survive if every such mistake forced a retrial. Section 169 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 is the law’s answer.

In two minutes

Section 169 of the BSA says that improper admission or rejection of evidence is not, of itself, a ground for a new trial or reversal if, independently of the evidence objected to and admitted, there was sufficient evidence to justify the decision, or if the rejected evidence, had it been received, ought not to have varied the decision.

The rest of this chapter

The full explanation, the cheat sheet, every previous-year question at every mark weight, the quiz and the answer skeletons are part of Law of Evidence on LexBlox Semester. Sign in to unlock the subject, or read Module 1 of Legal Language and Writing free.