Indian Evidence Act, 1872
8. Motive, preparation and previous or subsequent conduct
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
subject of any proceeding, is relevant, if such conduct influences or is
influenced by any fact ins issue or relevant fact, and whether it was previous
or subsequent thereto.
Explanation 1- The work
"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 him or in his 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 B had tried to had extort
money from A by threatening to make his 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 bound 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 the consulted vakils in
reference to making the will, and that he caused drafts or other wills to be
prepared of which he did not approve, are relevant.
(e) A is accused of a
crime.
The acts that, either
before or at the time of, or after the alleged crime, A proved evidence which would
tend to give to the facts of the case an appearance favorable to himself, or
that he 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 and 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 rupees 10,000.
The facts that A asked
C to lend him money, and that D said to C in A’s presence and hearing- "I
advise you not to trust A, for he B 10,000 rupees," 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 him 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, he absconded, or was in possession of
property of the proceeds of property acquired by the crime, or attempted to
conceal things which were or might have been used in committing if, are
relevant.
(j) The question is,
whether A was ravished.
The facts that,
shortly after the alleged rape, she 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, she said that she had been ravished is not
relevant as conduct under this section, though it may be relevant.
as a dying declaration
under section 32, clause (1), or
as corroborative
evidence under section 157.
(k) The question is, whether
A was robbed.
The fact that, soon
after the alleged robbery, he 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 he said he
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, clause (1), or
as corroborative
evidence under section 157.