Evidence Act 1893

This Act is the Evidence Act 1893.

Parts 1, 2 and 3 apply to all judicial proceedings in or before any court, but not to affidavits presented to any court or officer nor to proceedings before an arbitrator.

All rules of evidence not contained in any written law, so far as such rules are inconsistent with any of the provisions of this Act, are repealed.

In Parts 1, 2 and 3, unless the context otherwise requires —

One fact is said to be relevant to another when the one is connected with the other in any of the ways referred to in the provisions of this Act relating to the relevancy of facts.

A fact is said to be “proved” when, after considering the matters before it, the court either believes it to exist or considers its existence so probable that a prudent person ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists.

A fact is said to be “disproved” when, after considering the matters before it, the court either believes that it does not exist or considers its non-existence so probable that a prudent person ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it does not exist.

A fact is said to be “not proved” when it is neither proved nor disproved.

For the purposes of sections 23, 128, 130 and 131, a reference to “advocate or solicitor” in those sections includes a reference to the following:

In sections 23, 128A, 130 and 131, a “legal counsel” means —

Whenever it is provided by this Act that the court may presume a fact, it may either regard such fact as proved unless and until it is disproved, or may call for proof of it.

Whenever it is directed by this Act that the court is to presume a fact, the court is to regard such fact as proved unless and until it is disproved.

When one fact is declared by this Act to be conclusive proof of another, the court is, on proof of the one fact, to regard the other as proved, and is not to allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it.

Evidence may be given in any suit or proceeding of the existence or non-existence of every fact in issue and of such other facts as are hereinafter declared to be relevant, and of no others. Explanation.—This section does not enable any person to give evidence of a fact which the person is disentitled to prove by any provision of the law for the time being in force relating to civil procedure.Illustrations (a) A is tried for the murder of B by beating B with a club with the intention of causing B’s death. At A’s trial the following facts are in issue:

A’s beating B with the club;

A’s causing B’s death by such beating;

A’s intention to cause B’s death. (b) A, a party to a suit, does not comply with a notice given by B, the other party, to produce for B’s inspection a document referred to in A’s pleadings. This section does not enable A to put such document in evidence on A’s behalf in such suit, otherwise than in accordance with the conditions prescribed by the Rules of Court or the Family Justice Rules, as the case may be.

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.Illustrations (a) A is accused of the murder of B by beating B. Whatever was said or done by A or B or the bystanders at the beating or so shortly before or after it as to form part of the transaction is a relevant fact. (b) A is accused of waging war against the Government by taking part in an armed insurrection in which property is destroyed, troops are attacked and gaols are broken open. The occurrence of these facts is relevant as forming part of the general transaction, though A may not have been present at all of them. (c) A sues B for a libel contained in a letter forming part of a correspondence. Letters between the parties relating to the subject out of which the libel arose and forming part of the correspondence in which it is contained are relevant facts though they do not contain the libel itself. (d) The question is whether certain goods ordered from B were delivered to A. The goods were delivered to several intermediate persons successively. Each delivery is a relevant fact.

Facts which are the occasion, cause or 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.Illustrations (a) The question is whether A robbed B. The facts that shortly before the robbery B went to a fair with money in B’s possession, and that B showed or mentioned the fact that B had it to third persons, are relevant. (b) The question is whether A murdered B. Marks on the ground produced by a struggle at or near the place where the murder was committed are relevant facts. (c) The question is whether A poisoned B. The state of B’s health before the symptoms ascribed to poison and habits of B known to A which afforded an opportunity for the administration of poison, are relevant facts.

Any fact is relevant which shows or constitutes a motive or preparation for any fact in issue or relevant fact.

The conduct of any party or of any agent to any party to any suit or proceeding in reference to such suit or proceeding or in reference to any fact in issue therein or relevant thereto, and the conduct of any person an offence against whom is the subject of any proceeding, is relevant if such conduct influences or is influenced by any fact in issue or relevant fact, and whether it was previous or subsequent thereto. Explanation 1.—The word “conduct” in this section does not include statements unless those statements accompany and explain acts other than statements; but this explanation is not to affect the relevancy of statements under any other section of this Act. Explanation 2.—When the conduct of any person is relevant any statement made to the person or in his or her presence and hearing which affects such conduct is relevant.Illustrations (a) A is tried for the murder of B. The facts that A murdered C, that B knew that A had murdered C and that B had tried to extort money from A by threatening to make B’s knowledge public, are relevant. (b) A sues B upon a bond for the payment of money. B denies the making of the bond. The fact that at the time when the bond was alleged to be made B required money for a particular purpose is relevant. (c) A is tried for the murder of B by poison. The fact that before the death of B, A procured poison similar to that which was administered to B is relevant. (d) The question is whether a certain document is the will of A. The facts that not long before the date of the alleged will A made inquiry into matters to which the provisions of the alleged will relate, that A consulted lawyers in reference to making the will, and that A caused drafts of other wills to be prepared of which A did not approve are relevant. (e) A is accused of a crime. The facts that either before, or at the time of or after the alleged crime, A provided evidence which would tend to give to the facts of the case an appearance favourable to A, or that A destroyed or concealed evidence or prevented the presence or procured the absence of persons who might have been witnesses, or suborned persons to give false evidence respecting it, are relevant. (f) The question is whether A robbed B. The facts that after B was robbed, C said in A’s presence: “The police are coming to look for the man who robbed B”, and that immediately afterwards A ran away are relevant. (g) The question is whether A owes B $10,000. The facts that A asked C to lend A money, and that D said to C in A’s presence and hearing: “I advise you not to trust A for A owes B $10,000”, and that A went away without making any answer, are relevant facts. (h) The question is whether A committed a crime. The fact that A absconded after receiving a letter warning A that inquiry was being made for the criminal, and the contents of the letter, are relevant. (i) A is accused of a crime. The facts that after the commission of the alleged crime A absconded, or was in possession of property or the proceeds of property acquired by the crime, or attempted to conceal things which were or might have been used in committing it, are relevant. (j) The question is whether A was raped. The facts that shortly after the alleged rape A made a complaint relating to the crime, the circumstances under which and the terms in which the complaint was made, are relevant. The fact that without making a complaint A said that she had been raped is not relevant as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant as a dying declaration under section 32(1)(a), or as corroborative evidence under section 159. (k) The question is whether A was robbed. The fact that soon after the alleged robbery A made a complaint relating to the offence, the circumstances under which and the terms in which the complaint was made, are relevant. The fact that A said A had been robbed without making any complaint is not relevant as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant as a dying declaration under section 32(1)(a), or as corroborative evidence under section 159.

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.Illustrations (a) The question is whether a given document is the will of A. The state of A’s property and of A’s family at the date of the alleged will may be relevant facts. (b) A sues B for libel imputing disgraceful conduct to A; B affirms that the matter alleged to be libellous is true. The position and relations of the parties at the time when the libel was published may be relevant facts as introductory to the facts in issue. The particulars of a dispute between A and B about a matter unconnected with the alleged libel are irrelevant, though the fact that there was a dispute may be relevant if it affected the relations between A and B. (c) A is accused of a crime. The fact that soon after the commission of the crime A absconded from A’s house is relevant under section 8 as conduct subsequent to and affected by facts in issue. The fact that at the time when A left home A had sudden and urgent business at the place to which A went is relevant as tending to explain the fact that A left home suddenly. The details of the business on which A left are not relevant, except insofar as they are necessary to show that the business was sudden and urgent. (d) A sues B for inducing C to break a contract of service made by C with A. C on leaving A’s service says to A: “I am leaving you because B has made me a better offer”. This statement is a relevant fact as explanatory of C’s conduct, which is relevant as a fact in issue. (e) A accused of theft is seen to give the stolen property to B who is seen to give it to A’s wife. B says as B delivers it: “A says you are to hide this”. B’s statement is relevant as explanatory of a fact which is part of the transaction. (f) A is tried for a riot and is proved to have marched at the head of a mob. The cries of the mob are relevant as explanatory of the nature of the transaction. (g) A seeks to adduce evidence against B in the form of an electronic record. The method and manner in which the electronic record was (properly or improperly) generated, communicated, received or stored (by A or B), the reliability of the devices and the circumstances in which the devices were (properly or improperly) used or operated to generate, communicate, receive or store the electronic record, may be relevant facts (if the contents are relevant) as authenticating the electronic record and therefore as explaining or introducing the electronic record, or identifying it as the relevant electronic record to support a finding that the record is, or is not, what its proponent A claims.

Where there is reasonable ground to believe that 2 or more persons have conspired together to commit an offence or an actionable wrong, anything said, done or written by any one of such persons, in reference to their common intention after the time when such 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 for the purpose of proving the existence of the conspiracy as for the purpose of showing that any such person was a party to it.Illustrations Reasonable ground exists for believing that A has joined in a conspiracy to wage war against the Government. The facts that B procured arms in Europe for the purpose of the conspiracy, C collected money in Malacca for a like object, D persuaded persons to join the conspiracy in Province Wellesley, E published writings advocating the object in view at Singapore, and F transmitted from Singapore to G at Jakarta the money which C had collected at Malacca, and the contents of a letter written by H giving an account of the conspiracy are each relevant, both to prove the existence of the conspiracy and to prove A’s complicity in it, although A may have been ignorant of all of them, and although the persons by whom they were done were strangers to A, and although they may have taken place before A joined the conspiracy or after A left it.