Evidence Law: Indian Evidence Act, 1872 / Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA)

Facts Which Need Not Be Proved Sections 51 to 53

Facts Which Need Not Be Proved under Sections 51 to 53 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023: Judicial Notice and Admitted Facts

Part III of the Adhiniyam opens not with a rule about how facts are proved but with a short chapter about facts that need not be proved at all. Two categories are recognised. Some things a court is taken to know already, and requiring proof of them would be an absurdity. Other things the parties have agreed about, and requiring proof of those would be a waste. Sections 51 to 53 dispose of both, and they are the shortest chapter in the statute.

1. The Chapter

Chapter III of Part III comprises three sections. Section 51 states the consequence of judicial notice, Section 52 states what must be judicially noticed, and Section 53 deals with facts admitted. They correspond to Sections 56, 57 and 58 of the Indian Evidence Act.

The placement is deliberate. Part II has just finished setting out what is relevant; Part III is about to set out how relevant facts are proved. Before it does, the statute removes from the field two classes of fact that require no proof, so that the machinery of proof operates only on what is genuinely in contest.

2. Section 51 โ€” The Effect of Judicial Notice

Section 51, BSA โ€” Fact judicially noticeable need not be proved

No fact of which the Court will take judicial notice need be proved.

The section is one line and states a consequence rather than a rule. It does not say what a court must notice โ€” that is Section 52 โ€” but it establishes what follows once a fact falls within that category: no evidence is required, and none need be led.

Judicial notice rests on an idea that is easy to state. Courts are not blank instruments. A judge knows that India is a republic, that the year has twelve months, that a rupee is divided into a hundred paise, and that traffic in India keeps to the left. Requiring a litigant to prove such matters would waste time, invite absurdity, and produce the risk that a court might find a fact contrary to what everybody knows because the evidence happened to be inadequate.

The doctrine also serves consistency. If the content of Indian law had to be proved as a fact in each case, different courts might reach different conclusions about it on different evidence. Judicial notice ensures that the law is the same in every court, because no court is permitted to receive evidence about what it is.

3. Section 52 โ€” What Must Be Noticed

Section 52, BSA โ€” Facts of which Court must take judicial notice

The Court shall take judicial notice of the facts enumerated in the section.

The Court may resort to appropriate books or documents of reference for its aid in respect of any of these matters.

If the Court is called upon by any person to take judicial notice of any fact, it may refuse to do so unless and until such person produces any such book or document as it may consider necessary to enable it to do so.

Section 52 corresponds to Section 57 of the Indian Evidence Act, and the Adhiniyam has shortened and modernised the list. Provisions referable to the Crown, to the dominions of Great Britain, to the Commonwealth and to the Parliament of the United Kingdom have gone, and the enumeration has been recast for a sovereign republic operating in an international order.

3.1 The classes of fact

The matters enumerated fall into recognisable groups, and it is more useful to see the groups than to memorise a list.

Law. All laws in force in the territory of India. This is the most important entry in the section and the source of the fundamental proposition that Indian law is never a matter of evidence. A court is presumed to know it, may look up whatever it needs, and will not receive testimony about what a statute means.

International obligations. Treaties, agreements and conventions entered into by India with a country or countries, and decisions made by India at international associations or other bodies. This entry has been recast in the Adhiniyam and reflects the modern volume of India's international engagements.

Legislative proceedings. The course of proceeding of Parliament and of the State legislatures.

Official seals, offices and signatures. The seals of courts, of notaries public, and of other bodies authorised by law to use a seal; the accession to office, names, titles, functions and signatures of persons holding public office, where their appointment is notified in any Official Gazette.

Foreign states. The existence, title and national flag of every country or sovereign State recognised by the Government of India.

Time, geography and public occasions. The divisions of time, the geographical divisions of the world, and public festivals, fasts and holidays notified in the Official Gazette.

Territory and hostilities. The territories under the dominion of the Government of India, and the commencement, continuance and termination of hostilities between the Government of India and any other State or body of persons.

The court's own establishment. The names of the members and officers of the court, of their deputies and subordinate officers and assistants, and of all advocates and other persons authorised by law to appear or act before it.

The rule of the road. On land or at sea.

3.2 The two operative directions

Two sentences at the end of the section do the practical work, and they cut in opposite directions.

The first permits the court to resort to books and documents of reference. A court taking judicial notice is not confined to what the judge happens to remember. It may consult a statute book, a gazette, an almanac, a map, an official publication or a reference work, and it does so not as evidence but as an aid to its own knowledge.

The second permits the court to refuse to take judicial notice until the person asking for it produces the necessary book or document. This is a real limitation and prevents the doctrine from being used to smuggle in assertions. A party who asks the court to notice a notification must be ready to produce the Gazette; one who asks it to notice a holiday must produce the notification declaring it.

โš  Judicial notice and personal knowledge are different things

A judge may take judicial notice of what is generally known; he may not act on what he personally happens to know about the parties or the transaction. Private knowledge of a fact peculiar to the case is not judicial notice, and a judge who possesses it should ordinarily not try the case. The distinction is between the general knowledge every reasonable person shares and the particular knowledge that makes a person a witness rather than a judge.

4. Notorious Facts

Section 52 says the court shall take judicial notice of the enumerated matters. It does not say that the enumeration is exhaustive of everything a court may notice, and in practice courts have taken notice of facts of common knowledge outside the list.

๐Ÿ“– Onkar Nath v. Delhi Administration, (1977) 2 SCC 611

Held: Courts may take judicial notice of facts which are of common knowledge and which are so notorious that everybody, including judges, may be assumed to be aware of them. Where a strike by railway employees paralysed rail traffic across the country and was a matter of common knowledge reported everywhere, the Court held that judicial notice could be taken of the fact of the strike and of its general character, and that formal proof of it was unnecessary.

Ratio: Judicial notice extends to facts of such general notoriety that proof of them would be superfluous, and the enumeration in the section is not exhaustive of the doctrine.

The limit is notoriety. A fact is judicially noticeable on this footing only if it is so widely known that dispute about it is not seriously possible. A matter of controversy, a fact known only within a locality or a trade, or a fact known to the judge but not generally, does not qualify, and each must be proved in the ordinary way.

5. Indian Law and Foreign Law

The most consequential entry in Section 52 produces a distinction that runs through the whole subject and is worth stating separately.

Indian law is not a matter of evidence. A court takes judicial notice of it. No witness may be called to say what a statute provides or what a decision holds, no expert opinion on Indian law is receivable, and a party who pleads a provision does not prove it โ€” he cites it.

Foreign law is a question of fact. It is not within Section 52, and a court has no presumed knowledge of it. A party relying on foreign law must plead it and prove it, and the Adhiniyam supplies two routes: Section 32, which makes relevant an official publication of the foreign statute and an authorised report of the rulings of that country's courts, and Section 39, which makes relevant the opinion of a person specially skilled in that foreign law.

The consequence of failing to plead and prove foreign law is well settled as a matter of practice. The court does not take notice of it on its own motion, and in the absence of pleading and proof it proceeds on the presumption that the foreign law is the same as Indian law.

A custom having the force of law occupies an intermediate position. It is not within Section 52 and must be proved, but the Adhiniyam supplies special machinery for proving it โ€” Section 11 makes relevant the transactions and particular instances by which it was exercised or disputed, Section 26(d) makes relevant the opinion of a deceased person expressed before any controversy arose, and Section 42 makes relevant the opinion of a living person likely to know of its existence.

6. Section 53 โ€” Facts Admitted

Section 53, BSA โ€” Facts admitted need not be proved

No fact need be proved in any proceeding which the parties thereto 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.

Provided that the Court may, in its discretion, require the facts admitted to be proved otherwise than by such admissions.

The section recognises three ways in which a fact may be admitted, and the third is much the most important in practice.

  1. Agreement at the hearing. The parties or their agents may agree in court to admit a fact, and it then requires no proof.
  2. Written agreement before the hearing. An admission by writing under the parties' hands, of which the standard vehicles are a notice to admit facts and a notice to admit documents under Order XII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
  3. Deemed admission by the pleadings. Where a rule of pleading treats a party as having admitted a fact, the fact needs no proof. The principal rule is Order VIII Rule 5 of the Code, under which every allegation of fact in the plaint, if not denied specifically or by necessary implication, is taken to be admitted, except as against a person under a disability.

The three routes have a common effect: the fact ceases to be in issue. It is not that evidence of it becomes unnecessary as a matter of convenience; it is that the fact is established for the purposes of the proceeding, and the party who would otherwise have had to prove it is relieved of the burden.

7. The Proviso

The proviso is short and is regularly overlooked. Even where a fact has been admitted, the court may in its discretion require it to be proved otherwise than by the admission.

The discretion exists because parties may admit facts collusively, and because in certain proceedings the consequences extend beyond the parties before the court. Where a decree affects status, or the interests of persons not represented, or where the court suspects that the admission has been made to procure a result the parties could not otherwise obtain, the proviso permits it to insist on proof.

It is exercised most often in matrimonial and status proceedings, where a consent finding may affect the legitimacy of children, the rights of third parties, or the validity of a subsequent marriage. It is also exercised where the admission appears to have been made by a party under some disability or without appreciating its effect.

โš  An admission does not bind the court in the same way it binds the party

Section 53 relieves a party of the burden of proof. It does not compel the court to find the fact. The proviso preserves the court's control, and a court which doubts an admission is entitled to require proof notwithstanding the agreement of both sides. This is one of the few places in the Adhiniyam where the court is expressly given a discretion to override what the parties have agreed.

8. Judicial and Evidentiary Admissions

Section 53 deals with a particular kind of admission, and it is essential to distinguish it from the admissions dealt with in Sections 15 to 21.

Judicial admission โ€” Section 53

Evidentiary admission โ€” Sections 15 to 21

Where made

In the pleadings, or by agreement at or before the hearing

Outside the proceeding โ€” in correspondence, conversation, accounts or electronic communication

Effect

The fact need not be proved. It ceases to be in issue

Substantive evidence of the fact, but the fact remains in issue

Rebuttable

Not by evidence; only by amendment of the pleading with leave

Yes โ€” the maker may show it mistaken, ambiguous or untrue

Burden

Removed altogether

Shifted onto the maker, who must displace his own statement

Court's control

The proviso permits the court to require proof notwithstanding

The court weighs the admission with the rest of the evidence

๐Ÿ“– Nagindas Ramdas v. Dalpatram Ichharam alias Brijram, (1974) 1 SCC 242

Held: Admissions, if true and clear, are by far the best proof of the facts admitted. Admissions in pleadings or judicial admissions, admissible under the provision corresponding to Section 53, made by the parties or their agents at or before the hearing, stand on a higher footing than evidentiary admissions. The former class are fully binding on the party that makes them and constitute a waiver of proof. They by themselves can be made the foundation of the rights of the parties. Evidentiary admissions, on the other hand, are not conclusive proof of the facts admitted and may be explained or shown to be wrong.

Ratio: The leading authority on the distinction. A judicial admission binds and dispenses with proof; an evidentiary admission is strong but rebuttable.

9. Where the Chapter Fits

Sections 51 to 53 perform a filtering function, and their relationship with the rest of the statute is best seen as a sequence.

  1. Part II determines what is relevant โ€” Sections 3 to 50.
  2. Sections 51 to 53 remove from the field those relevant facts which need no proof โ€” because the court notices them, or because the parties have admitted them.
  3. Sections 54 and 55 govern the proof of the remainder by oral evidence.
  4. Sections 56 to 93 govern the proof of the remainder by documentary evidence, including electronic records.
  5. Sections 94 to 103 govern the exclusion of oral evidence by documentary evidence.
  6. Part IV governs the burden of proof, the examination of witnesses, and the effect of the evidence.

A practitioner working through a case follows the same order. What is in issue; what of that is relevant; what of the relevant needs no proof; how the remainder is to be proved; and who bears the burden of proving it.

10. The Position Stated Shortly

  1. Section 51 states a consequence โ€” a fact judicially noticeable need not be proved.
  2. Section 52 enumerates what must be noticed, and the list has been shortened and modernised, with colonial references removed.
  3. Indian law is judicially noticed and is never a matter of evidence. Foreign law is a question of fact and must be pleaded and proved under Sections 32 and 39.
  4. A court may consult books and documents of reference, and may refuse to notice a fact until the party asking produces the necessary material.
  5. Judicial notice extends to notorious facts outside the enumeration, but the test is genuine notoriety โ€” Onkar Nath.
  6. Judicial notice is not personal knowledge, and a judge may not act on what he privately knows about the case.
  7. Section 53 recognises three routes to admission โ€” agreement at the hearing, written agreement before it, and deemed admission by the pleadings under the rules of pleading.
  8. The proviso preserves the court's discretion to require proof notwithstanding an admission, and is used most often in matrimonial and status proceedings.
  9. A judicial admission stands higher than an evidentiary admission โ€” it waives proof rather than merely supplying evidence.

11. Related Topics and Provisions

Topic or provision

Connection

Judicial Notice

Sections 51 and 52 in detail

Admissions in Pleadings and Proof

Section 53 and the procedural rules that operate through it

Admission โ€” Meaning, Definition and Essentials

Evidentiary admissions under Sections 15 to 21

Evidentiary Value of Admissions

The distinction between judicial and evidentiary admissions

Statements Made Under Special Circumstances โ€” Sections 28 to 32

Section 32 on foreign law, and the contrast with judicial notice of Indian law

Sections 39 and 42, BSA

Expert opinion on foreign law, and opinion as to a general custom or right

Order VIII Rule 5 and Order XII, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Non-traverse, notices to admit, and judgment on admissions