Section 11 of Indian Evidence Act 1872: When Facts Not Otherwise Relevant Become Relevant
Section 11 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 dealt with facts which are not independently relevant under another provision but become relevant because they are inconsistent with a fact in issue or relevant fact, or because they make such a fact highly probable or highly improbable.
What Section 11 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 Provided
Section 11 - When facts not otherwise relevant become relevant
Facts not otherwise relevant are relevant:
(1) if they are inconsistent with any fact in issue or relevant fact;
(2) if by themselves or in connection with other facts they make the existence or non-existence of any fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or improbable.
The provision therefore operated as an additional rule of relevancy. A fact which did not fall within another specific rule could still be admitted when it had the strong logical connection required by either clause of Section 11.
Important Definitions for Understanding Section 11
Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act supplied the basic expressions used throughout the Act. They are important because Section 11 repeatedly refers to a "fact", a "fact in issue" and a "relevant fact".
| Expression | Meaning under the Evidence Act |
|---|---|
| Fact | A thing, state of things or relation of things capable of being perceived by the senses, and also a mental condition of which a person is conscious. |
| Facts in issue | Facts from which, alone or with other facts, the existence, non-existence, nature or extent of a right, liability or disability asserted or denied in a suit or proceeding necessarily follows. |
| Relevant | One fact is relevant to another when the two are connected in a manner recognized by the provisions of the Act dealing with relevancy of facts. |
The Two Tests of Relevancy Under Section 11
1. Inconsistency with a fact in issue or relevant fact
A fact becomes relevant under clause (1) when it is incompatible with, or tends to contradict, a fact in issue or another relevant fact. The classic example is an alibi: proof that the accused was at a place so distant from the scene at the material time that presence at the scene becomes impossible or highly unlikely.
2. Making a fact highly probable or highly improbable
Clause (2) is concerned with strong probability. The otherwise irrelevant fact must, either by itself or together with other facts, make the existence or non-existence of a fact in issue or relevant fact highly probable or improbable. A merely remote, speculative or weak connection is not enough.
Illustrations to Section 11 Explained
Illustration (a): Presence elsewhere and alibi
If the question is whether A committed a crime at Calcutta on a particular day, the fact that A was at Lahore on that day is relevant. Likewise, evidence that A was at a sufficiently distant place near the time of the crime is relevant when the distance makes A's participation highly improbable, even if not absolutely impossible.
This illustration demonstrates both inconsistency and high improbability. The evidentiary value depends on the time, distance, reliability of the proof and whether the circumstances genuinely conflict with the alleged presence of the accused at the scene.
Illustration (b): Excluding other possible offenders
Where the circumstances establish that a crime must have been committed by one among A, B, C or D, facts showing that no person outside that group could have committed it, together with facts excluding B, C and D, are relevant to the question whether A committed the crime.
The illustration shows how several facts, considered together, can materially alter the probability of a fact in issue.
Practical Application of Section 11
Section 11 was frequently important where a party relied on circumstantial evidence, an alibi, exclusionary facts, alternative explanations or other facts that acquired significance only because of their effect on a disputed fact. Its operation was not confined to criminal cases; the rule formed part of the general law of relevancy applicable to judicial proceedings governed by the Indian Evidence Act.
- Alibi: evidence of presence elsewhere may contradict alleged presence at the place of occurrence.
- Alternative hypothesis: facts may be relevant when they strongly support or negate a competing explanation concerning a fact in issue.
- Exclusion: facts excluding other possibilities may become relevant when their combined effect materially changes the probability of the disputed fact.
- Probability must be substantial: the words "highly probable or improbable" impose a stronger threshold than a loose or remote connection.
Relationship with Other Relevancy Provisions
Section 11 should be read with the structure of Chapter II of the Indian Evidence Act. Sections 5 to 10 dealt with evidence of facts in issue and particular classes of relevant facts, while Section 11 addressed otherwise irrelevant facts that acquired relevance through inconsistency or a strong probability connection. Depending on the circumstances, a fact could also be relevant under another specific provision of the Act.
Summary
Under Section 11 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a fact not otherwise relevant could become relevant in two situations: first, when it was inconsistent with a fact in issue or relevant fact; and second, when alone or with other facts it made the existence or non-existence of such a fact highly probable or highly improbable. The section was therefore an important rule for alibi, exclusionary evidence and other strongly probative circumstances under the pre-Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam evidence regime.
This page is a general legal-information article on the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and is not a substitute for advice on the facts of a particular proceeding.